It's OPG's (Ontario Power Generation) latest PSA. It's about awareness that ice near hydro-dams on rivers and lakes is unsafe. True story. Because water levels near hydro dams fluctuate quickly, the ice on the rivers is prone to cracking and being thin. My old drug dealing neighbor told me story about how a dude slammed into an icewall in Ontario because of this. My neighbor was probably BS'ing me, but I digress.
The message of the ad is important. But the person starring in it? Terrible. This is the shit that makes yankees think we're all lumberjacks.
Old man, flannel plaid jacket, bushy beard, wood axe, talks about his snowmobile, standing in the wilderness. The guy honestly reminds me of my dad, and I have no idea whether to take him seriously or not.
Then he drops this bombshell, my favourite part, in a spooky mysterious voice:“What goes on beneath the ice in this river is a mystery that won't never be solved...it's like an enigma, wrapped up in a conundrum, inside a...FURRY BLANKET OF I DON'T KNOW WHAT.”
Oh Jesus no! Not a furry blanket!
Then this jackass comes on, happy music plays and everything is...alright? I guess?
Every time this ad plays I feel a little destitute, like someone told me they did something bad to me while I was sleeping but I'll never know about it. Violated is the term I'm thinking of.Can anyone explain it to me? Can anyone please unwrap this mysterious furry-blanket of conundrums and tell me just what the hell is going in this ad?
Radiohead - Creep
12 comments:
That is the STUPIDEST commerical!
Did you notice the small text that comes up while he talks?
"It's No Mystery"
"Stay Clear of Thin Ice"
"Around Dams and Hydro Stations"
It's almost like the text is trying to correct what the old man is spouting... it's no urban legend - It's REAL! lol
Yes! Exactly! How can I take this guy seriously when the entire first 23 seconds are discredited by three captions?
I thought that the commercial was brilliant, and I understood it completely. You sir on the other hand do not understand irony of the commercial, and you claim to make commercials and this one confused you? That frightens me, you're probably the corporate suit that makes all the lame and tedious commercials that no one cares about. I hope this blog is some sort of joke or you're just "trolling". You sir seem under qualified for your job.
Alright, I'll bite. Here's what I think is wrong with ad in great detail:
1) The severity of the message is totally lost in the absurdity of the character. Seriously? An axe? Why does he even have that?
2) My google statistics indicate that the only thing people take away from this commercial is that an old man says "A furry blanket conundrum."
3) The old man's dialogue, while eerie, serves its purpose to paint a scene of terror-on-ice. However, it's so ridiculous you can't take it seriously.
The entire problem with this ad is that old man is just ridiculous, and it only detracts from the message OPG is trying to deliver. Is it ironic? No.
The only irony here is that OPG made a better ad last year starring a talking fish voiced by Red Green.
In response here is what I think. However, if you’re easily offended, which I have a feeling you are, then you should stop reading right now.
1. The character is absurd because that’s what they were going for, this guy spouting ridiculous things, that the river covered in thin ice is a mystery and that it’s a dangerous thing but no one knows why, and that it is a conundrum above all… Then the irony comes in, the text that refutes what this mad man is saying, suggesting that thin ice and rivers near turbine power plants are dangerous and that it’s no mystery, you clearly missed that point… As for the axe, that doesn’t even matter they are trying to create a character, also you suggest the axe adds to the ridiculousness, what is so ridiculous about a guy out in nature with an axe? Chances are he was going to use it to cut down a tree, you know the thing people use axes for, but once again you were flustered by this… I’d say you can relate to this guy, you are both easily confused by simple things, thin ice on a river is dangerous and the message is clear.
2. So there is Google statistics that show people are researching the commercial, OPG wins again, people saw it, liked it, and want more information on it. It definitely made a lasting impression on the viewer’s minds to make them look it up, to watch again and reassess the message it provides. In fact what I took from it was the parts that were designed to grab my attention, so then I Google’d it for some more info, and was led to this blog, where I hoped to find more information but was displeased to find a moron ranting about how they can’t understand commercials.
3. His dialogue does serve its eerie purpose to make one think the thin ice and river is very dangerous but for mysterious reasons as he explains, the text then suggests that it’s not mysterious; it’s dangerous for real reasons. Once again you have appeared unable to comprehend this.
The problem with this ad is that ignorant fools like you that pay attention to details like an axe can’t even come close to understanding the message that OPG is delivering. It is ironic you just have a hard time understanding the simple concepts the rest of us don’t. If you find my response belittling and offensive then let me ask what the fuck you were expecting? You’re the one that started an online blog complaining about things that most everyone else comprehends with ease, and because you are a blogger it leads me to believe you thrive off of debates and arguments like this. You also claimed to make commercials, if this is true I question whether you understand the purpose of ads, or if you just play it by the book and just learned about ads from schooling but do not understand what you’ve learned.
Anyways I’m done, no use arguing with idiots, they just drag you down to their level and win with experience. I know you’re thinking I’m the idiot, but let us not forget that I understand the commercials message.
I had a couple of points to refute you, but it appears as though I've been censored. So I'm going to leave on this, it's a good commercial and just because you don't understand it doesn't mean its a bad commercial.
Sorry dude, SPAM filter. It looks like arguing behind the veil of anonymity doesn't always work in your favour. I don't censor anything, and you can count on that.
I know you think you were censored, but seeing as I found your comment, I hope you'll stick around. This time, maybe with a little less name calling.
You're right about arguing on the internet, I'm pretty stoked about some healthy debate actually. You're the first person to ever argue with me on this blog. I'm not offended by name calling at all, especially over the internet. It's even happened on this blog before.
To be fair though, the first time I was called an incompetent moron was by some 11 year old girls whose dance routine I likened to a soft-core strip show, which I'm sure personally offended them.
What's your excuse?
Now, to the ad.
The point I'm trying to make is that his dialogue, appearence, and attitude don't effectively convey seriousness. It's sort of like those dorks who wear fedoras, thinking they look like Sinatra, but instead look like...dorks.
It's well and good to make a "relateable" character, but the ad spends too much time (literally %80 of the ad) on him spouting nonsense. PSAs are pretty much free reign territory for ad makers to make something truly shocking. The message, while clear, loses severity.
Here is an example from an ad campaign that uses seriousness, and shocking images to convey its message. I'd say they did a fine job:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Haa4QImf40
This is the point I've been trying to make. If OPG wanted to go for creepy, they kinda nailed it. If they wanted to go for mysterious, they kinda got that down too. But serious? Not as close to the mark as they had hoped.
This is follwed by a knees-up shot of the smiling lawman that doesn't add to the impact of the ad at all.
The ad was aiming to hit this one out of the park, but instead only made it to first or second base at best
To make it more serious, I probably would have kept everything the same, even the ridiculous dialogue; Except, I'd have doused the old man in water, made him shiver, and wrap him in a furry blanket. This would imply that he had a brush with death, even closer than losing his snowmobile. It would add to his message rather than just a bushy bearded man with an axe.
(By the way, ever tried cutting down a tree with an axe? It sucks. Why would he be snowmobiling with intent to cut down a tree without a chainsaw, or something haul all that wood?)
This ad wasn't made for me, it was made for you. If the ad worked for you, awesome. OPG did its job, you now know to stay clear of thin ice. We're arguing from two entirely different sides of the spectrum.
Like a carpenter pays attention to details in buildings that the average person never notices, and a filmmaker sees nuances in movies that you and I glaze over, I pay attention to little details in ads. It's literally what I do for a living. You as a viewer just have to soak it all in.
I value your opinion, I really really do. I love nothing more than to discuss advertising, and if we were in the same city I'd love to sit down with a few beers and continue this discussion over some fine television.
Holy Debate Batman!
I've been working in television broadcast for three years, so I can say with confidence that it is impossible to please everyone all of the time. There is always somebody complaining about something and that never goes away no matter what you do. Perhaps this commercial was the lesser of 3 evils that were created?
I do think this commercial was poorly executed. As soon as something becomes unintentionally hilarious, the message is lost. The message was lost on this commercial the first time I watched it. I had to watch it 3 times in the row to get the message because I kept laughing.
People are looking this commercial up online because they want to laugh at it, not revel in it's wonderful message.
The character they created for the ad was clearly of a lower intellect than most. This surprised me because outdoorsman are actually highly intelligent and of all people would know to steer clear of thin ice and hydro stations.
I think this ad disaffected a lot of people because the character was unrelatable and just plain crazy. He made a mockery of the message.
This ad, though I understand is maybe meant in an ironic sense, is completely missing the point in itself. I've been voicing ads and PSAs for a little over four years now and I would never attach myself to an add like this in either broadcast radio or T.V. .
Something to consider, this is not an advertisement, they (0PG) aren't selling a product but rather they are selling a message. When you're selling a message it is NOT the time to introduce irony or subtle themes.
Why is it poor execution to be subtle in PSAs? Well, especially in the case of this one, for the simple fact that it doesn't reach a broad enough audience. Anonymous, do you really think children are picking up on the subtle irony? How about the slow witted or mentally challenged? Those aforementioned seem like a pretty large segment that could be susceptible to ice hazards.
As for the dialogue and character...they're both idiotic. I get it, they're trying to be humorous, the guy is a slow lumberjack (or something) but I don't believe that ice hazards are fertile ground for high comedy. Spouting broken English doesn't make a character relatable, it makes people zone out because they're thinking 'Who's this fucking clown and why should I listen to him'.
A PSA, especially of this magnitude, can be creative and captivating, abso-Fucking-lutely, but in a manner which is more informative and less idiotic.
In point form:
- The Character and dialogue were terrible.
- I didn't buy that there was a serious danger and neither would anyone else.
- I dare say the message was severely undersold.
- Talking down to people isn't good; is this how OPG sees the people of Ontario?
Maxwell's Point Of View
I think the main problem with the ad campaign in general is that it does not communicate the message properly. I came away from these ads understanding nothing about what exactly I am supposed to be avoiding re: hydro dams. Honestly, I didn't even notice the thin ice caption until I read about it on this website. And the other ads are equally mysterious to me, even though I have seen them many times.
Query: If Hydro dams and their related equipment are concealed and are often mistaken for mysterious or unknown phenomena (as the ad clearly implies) what is the point of advising me to steer clear if I don't know what I'm looking for that I should be steering clear of?
Conversely, if Hydro dams and their related equipment are easy to spot and avoid, then why does this old man seem to mistake them for paranormal phenomena? Is the old man blind?
The ads are completely illogical and utterly fail in accomplishing their goal.
My chief complaint with this series of ads is that I have no clue what I am supposed to be avoiding or taking care around. Yes, I understand in the abstract what a hydro dam is, (thinking of the Hoover Dam, for instance) but the commercial implies that the threat isn't obvious, that it's something that could be misunderstood by the general public.
So if it's not obvious, then what should I be looking for to avoid?
If the threat is obvious, then why does the old man claim it's mysterious? Is he supposed to be blind as well as stupid?
Incidentally, I did not even notice the "stay clear of ice" caption until I read about it here. So that went right over my head when I saw those commercials on TV.
My husband & I (in Quebec) actually backed this ad up x2 on the pvr. We kept thinking there was a punchline we were missing somewhere, or that The Onion was behind it. It is one truly bizarre and ineffective PSA.
Post a Comment