You've read or heard about Marketing 2.0, Agency 2.0, PR 2.0 and probably even Brands 2.0. Here's an opportunity to redress the balance by extending the new world's most travelled suffix by introducing it to a corner of the advertising world that's managed to insulate itself from the ebb and flow of changes happening around us.
And I am referring to creative. What's the role of creative in this world of social media and user generated content? What's the role of the Creative Director in this new environment? But most important of all, who is the Creative Director-in-charge when we are awash with brand messages, some from expected sources and most from unexpected sources?
The right question to ask I believe is 'who isn't the Creative Director?' In a world where there are no defining boundaries between media and audiences, creators and users, producers and consumers - and in agencies of 'creative generalists', everyone who comes into contact with a brand message and affects the way it's made or transmitted (from his inbox to those of his friends', for eg.) is a Creative Director.
It's a change you'll not hear about from anyone - especially not from the creative themselves. Because as the reigning high priests of the advertising world they'd like to believe that all offerings to the Gods have to be made through them. But a process of democritisation - a spreading around of authority, power and the keys to the temple - is what's happening everywhere in the world of advertising; and creative are not going to be immune from it.
So what can we - planners, agency-folk, evolved creatives, and plain old consumers of advertising - do to hasten the inevitable? For starters, we can prepare ourselves to carry out the responsibilities we will eventually inherit by practicing the creative director's craft - right here, right now.
And what's the creative director's craft? In another context, legendary Hollywood director Sidney Lumet quotes that a director's only job is to make decisions. And so it is with advertising too - there may be better ideators, writers, art directors, filmmakers, web designers around him/her, but it is the creative director who decides what makes the cut and what doesn't.
Not too difficult a skill to practice and cultivate, isn't it? Which is why I'm introducing this new weekly feature called 'Creative Director 2.0' Each Thursday, I will post a creative piece here and will pose you a simple question (via a poll) - thumbs up or thumbs down? There will be reasons, enhancements, questions about brand tone etc and rants you will want to share - and please do leave comments and incite a debate - but the essential question to you is : 'You are the Creative Director calling the shots. Would you let this ad go through?'
I want to start with a commercial that has evoked some pretty sharp response - it's been on air for some time now and you would have seen it. For those who haven't, here it is:
And here's the ballot box:
Voting closes early morning (IST) of next Thursday, 5th April 2007, when it will be time to announce the winner of this week and exercise our opinion over the fate of another piece of creative :)
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
I'll let this ad go albeit with few changes. Thats up for debate post results.
Roop, go ahead and post your views in the comments - that's where it is being debated :)
Okay as a CD 2.0 I will let the ad go through. Why? The production value, music and the execution is far far better when compared to most other ads in India at the moment.
Though not an original idea at the first place but a nice way of portraying local flavor. And building the story. I stop here and await other's response.
hi,
iam a advertising student aspiring to be a planner in future. though an amateur i feel no harm in having views.my poll for this is thumbs down...though it may have production value, i feel this ad is not attractive to a common man.i mean a person who sees it with bare eyes.i feel this ad is a bad idea with great execution....rather this ad is more of entertainment than communication... i feel money involved in airing this full ad approx 40lakhs for one time is not a worthy investment....
It's a beautifully made film - it's a director's film. The idea isn't unique, the cricket loving nation isn't an insight that lights up my head - but it's beautiful, that's it. It is however, far too long and gets pretty boring after a coupla watches. If I was the CD, like Roop - I might suggest some changes - I'd prolly want it on air for sheer value and talk it'll generate but I'd support it with ambient, viral and activities to leverage it - not sure if they're already doing this, I haven't seen anything around it.
I'm probably an anomaly - but I associate Nike with running (prolly Run London campaigns?)+ I use their spesh running trainers
As an aside, I love Puma! I love Puma! I love Puma - maybe coz they're more fashion + function. And I never used to love Puma as a kid, but they've really revamped their look since.. esp. love the maharishi + nuala collabs
entertaining ad. will produce talk. didnt push product. far too long. agree with fink on extra viral/ambient. hate puma.
Thank God they didn't listen to any of us and just went ahead and did it.
Ok, let's look at it from the brand's perspective. Worldwide, Nike is known for its creative excellence. And , it has changed the face of sports advertising forever.
The creative had one opportunity to create history. And they screwed up by doing an idea that was already done. They should thank the director of the film for saving their collective asses.
Why is it not the writer's or the creative director's or the team's film? how do we know the writer of the commercial didn't think of the idea?
I love the commercial. I buy Nike and I think this one works for Nike.
For some reason, whenever sportswear brands in India have tried to associate with cricket, the execution has ended up as a substitute for the idea (like the Adidas Sachin-God commercial).
Now, Nike was on the Indian cricket team's world cup uniform. So it would've been tempting to do one of those exasperating pseudo-motivational stories about the world cup (like the Pepsi billion or Reebok's "The game is all that matters"). But Nike just took a simple unoriginal idea (that cricket in India belongs to the common man) and made it look beautiful. They even managed to use Sreesanth and Zaheer Khan in a nice unobtrusive manner. Like fink said, it's a director's film, and I don't think that's such a big flaw.
I cast my vote in there too over the weekend - and it was thumbs down. Not because it wasn't an original idea - I have worked long enough in the industry to know that originality isn't always the holy grail we are seeking.
But when compared to the Nike soccer commercials - the inspiration - it pales. Soccer is a simpler and more fluid game - making those films seem seamless in the way they shift from ordinary/boring situations to the thick of action.
I cannot help but feel that the cricket game felt messy and inelegant - in the way it starts and in the way it's played.
I know the commercial is taking liberties and stretching the boundaries of reality - my problem is not that it does that. My problem is that it doesn't do enough of it.
Though voting is still on and its very close - the lack of a clear sweep of awe and acceptance for me means it's an opportunity lost for Nike.
My personal favourite for a street cricket commercial is the one Sony Max featured with Kapil Dev and a kid. Anyone remember that one?
I think the Nike commercial rocks. And I think the last shot is a stroke of genius. The last shot sums up what cricket in India is all about: no matter what, the game goes on. If you've been to Azad Maidan in Mumbai, you'll know what I mean.
One more thing: The music is simply awesome. and don't forget that stroke of genius when the guy calls out to guy in the balcony as 'balcony'. That is just so Mumbai, the cradle of cricket in India. It's an outstanding film.
i enjoyed watching the ad more than once :) good soundtrack too.
The Sony Max "Oye Rukh Jaa" Kapil Ad with the Kid was indeed a better commercial I must admit. But here we are judging a creative/ advertisement in its India context. In that measure, I feel the Nike Ad scores high. Common let's be honest, how often do we get to see an execution of this calibre. And speaking of original idea, we hardly have one except those few which agencies send the One Show/ The works etc but never airs on mainstream channels.
Thumbs up for it.
I must admit the soundtrack was an inspired choice and to me is the sole reason that gives it repeat viewing value.
Its a thumbs down from me. As far as the ad goes, its a great creative idea that communicates nothing...I dont know about the originality of the campaign but there have been simpler and ads which have been delectable, both as creatives and as communication pieces...
Post a Comment