[catachresis]

I dreamed this would happen someday. Surely, this is an omen that the End Times are near!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...08/ixhome.html

 

[Edwood]

Full coverage here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in933310.shtml

Not for the kiddies.

But since Smurfs is part of my childhood, this ad is definitely aimed squarely at people like me.

But What, man? Seriously, you can't make up a headline like that.

-Ed

 

[catachresis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edwood But What, man? Seriously, you can't make up a headline like that. -Ed

I dunno, it just seemed so improbable -- so phantasmagorical, like those funny episodes where the refrigerator smells like gasoline and the rain makes a clashing sound like tiny cymbals that you get when you've missed the medication for a day or two and the cotton buds won't stop all that fluid leaking out of your ears. I usually turn the volume down some when that happens.

 

[ken36]

You just have to love the the idea they really are finally losing it.

 

[jefemeister]

I think the advertisement is a good idea. It's humorous (in a odd way I know) and different and I think will get the message across better than the normal routes.

As a side note, everyone knows that Paramount is planning to release the first of a Smurf trilogy in 2008 right? I, personally, can't wait. Especially if they slant it for the 20-30 yr old crowd that grew up with them.

 

[PSmith08]

Unicef. Bombs. The. Smurfs.


No further comment would be worthwhile.

 

[adhoc]

have you seen their (UNICEF) cartoon ads against landmines and the sexual abuse of children?

seriously. disturbing. stuff.

i usually look away, then donate.

 

[Gigabomber]

"We wanted something that was real war - Smurfs losing arms, or a Smurf losing a head -but they said no."

Shoulda just allowed a clip of Saving Private Ryan and inserted a picture of a guy tossing a baby onto his bayonet and cut out the middleman.

Once again a company is using frightening advertising and getting just what they want: extreme news coverage.

Course I heard that tens of thousands of children have been orphaned resulting from middle-east activities alone, and that is pretty frightening considering how many natural disasters have cropped up in the last month's time.

Phase two: show drugged, raped and sexually deviant smurfs during primetime (I love the thx1138 / big brother language that reveals social disconnection).

Viva la Smurf

 

[blip]

I need a copy of this clip.... That's the funniest/saddest thing I've seen all week.

Seriously, I think it may be a good concept for them.

 

[flecom]

I really hope UNICEF gets sued for that...

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by flecom I really hope UNICEF gets sued for that...

How?

They were given permission from the family of the Smurf's creator.

-Ed

 

[MarcusH]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edwood How? They were given permission from the family of the Smurf's creator. -Ed

For me the question isn't "How?", but "Why?". IMHO, it was a rather clever concept - invading into the Smurf village synonymically with your childhood idyll.
A reason, why I can understand people not liking that clip/ad, is the impact on children, they most probably won't understand it and might be irritated, to say the least.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigabomber Once again a company is using frightening advertising and getting just what they want: extreme news coverage.

First of all, UNICEF isn't a company it's an organisation.
With regard to "extreme news coverage", you're only looking at an (partial!) effect it might have, not the reasons or the cause. With your slightly derogatory style of the sentence and using the word "company" to refer to UNICEF, you're accusing them that their reasons are the same as for other companies. The fundamental reason for a company is simple: to make profit. While there isn't _anything_ bad about making profit, you're basically indirectly accusing UNICEF to crave for media attention in order to make some profit. Nothing could be farther away from reality - as an organisation they're neither making any profit per se nor will you find any "company" whose basic motivation is an altruistic and philantropic one. Same effect - different causes.
If you're looking at companies who use "frightening advertising" in order to get "extreme news coverage" take a look at Benetton. I guess everybody remembers their ad campaign some years ago.... Following your logic there's basically no moralic difference between Benetton and UNICEF.

Yes, this ad is provoking, I hope it's at least provoking some thoughts if nothing else *g*.

Ciao,
Marcus

P.S.: I believe you don't think the way I caricatured your way of thinking, I guess you know very well that there IS a difference between Benetton's and UNICEF's intentions.

 

[catachresis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcusH P.S.: I believe you don't think the way I caricatured your way of thinking, I guess you know very well that there IS a difference between Benetton's and UNICEF's intentions.

Of course we do! P.S. - Could I get that cashmere-mix sweater in an XL (and still use the 20%-off coupon I got off Fatwallet)?

-- Oh, and war is terrible! I'd never fight with Papa Smurf -- not even if he is European!

 

[MarcusH]

Quote:

Originally Posted by catachresis Of course we do! P.S. - Could I get that cashmere-mix sweater in an XL (and still use the 20%-off coupon I got off Fatwallet)? -- Oh, and war is terrible! I'd never fight with Papa Smurf -- not even if he is European!

Oh that was very funny - I almost laughed. If bad sarcasm is everything you can add to the discussion you'd better keep quiet. You could have come up with factual arguments to define your position.

 

[blip]

Oooo.... Everyone is touchy tonight.

Seriously, this story amazes me... I'm just having a hard time picturing the UNICEF people sitting down with the Smurf people and saying "Well here's what we want to do...."

Now THAT must have been an awesome meeting!