NORTHERN PLANNER

CONFUSED AS YOU ARE

recent posts

about

No Country for Old Men

If you haven’t seen this film, hire the DVD, buy it, you need to see it. Too many reasons to go into, the acting, the taught script, the way Havier Bardem manages to become a human Terminator – you believe he can’t be stopped.

But the thing that most grabs me about this film is the way it works after you’ve seen it. It’s enthralling to be sure, but it finishes and then a little later you start thinking, then a little more..and you cannot stop going back over the film, getting more depth, making more links. It just gets better the longer it is since you watched it. Is that an example of deceptive cadence?

Now consider ads and stuff, how they have to compete with popular culture now they cannot interupt. How many ads make you want to think and discuss like that?

Posted in

10 responses to “No Country for Old Men”

  1. Rob @ Cynic Avatar
    Rob @ Cynic

    I’ve mixed feelings on this post …
    Without doubt advertising isn’t competing with other advertising anymore [if it ever did] it’s competitors are things like movies, games, experiences and even books – many that are created with more money, time and imagination than adland could ever hope to get/achieve.
    What this means is we [and the clients who make the products/brands we have to communicate] have to think bigger, broader, more imaginatively and more interestingly if we hope to ever mean something to an increasingly cynical/uninterested public.
    Of course all agencies/clients say this – and I appreciate and encourage all ‘communication’ also has to be an ‘ad’ for the agency behind it – but too often the industry focuses on pleasing its peers rather than also impressing the clients who are funding it all and this seems abit short-sighted to me.
    Which leads to the bit that I am slightly uneasy with [though I’m not suggesting you’re saying what I’m about to write]
    I do not believe adland should ever just focus on achieving ‘talkability’ – or ‘awareness’ as they love to bang on about. Sure great ads create debate but unless they are developed with the purpose to benefit the clients commercial operation [or at least against a core target group], it is quite often nothing more than self-indulgence.
    Of course one persons greatness is another persons self importance – but the reality is adland is in the mass people moving industry and if this post says anything, it’s that to make an impression we must be creative, imaginative and interesting without always using the classic ‘media channels’ as the only mediums that can affect change.
    I know this is a rant and it’s all over the place PLUS a movie like ‘No Country For Old Men’ is not a commercial/product placement laden movie that much of Hollywood produces [so it is especially hard to compare it to a commercially focused piece of communication that wants you to actually do something] but I guess what you’re saying – and what I wholeheartedly agree with – is that we should stop going for the lowest common denominator in communication and aim higher because people will react positively towards that … which means I’ve banged on for too long about something I could of said in one sentence.
    Can I blame the jetlag? Please????

    Like

    Reply
  2. northern Avatar
    northern

    I love it when you rant. And nothing winds me up more than agency people making stuff they like and nothing more.
    As far as the ad’s objective, I’ve always felt they should be culturally useful, of course the take-out has to be something that contributes to the commercial objective, but the problem starts when the only objective is believed to be ‘sell more’ rather than saleability

    Like

    Reply
  3. Rob @ Cynic Avatar
    Rob @ Cynic

    The old [BBH] adage: Make them want to buy rather than try to sell … still the best way to look at what we’re here to do because it means things like brand and emotional value as well as cultural relevance/meaning/purpose all come into play as well.
    Now someone tell me how Cadbury’s Trucks does that please 🙂

    Like

    Reply
  4. northern Avatar
    northern

    Now that would be worth seeing……

    Like

    Reply
  5. Rob @ Cynic Avatar
    Rob @ Cynic

    Careful NP, I am starting to have unnatural feelings of love for you now.
    Lets blame the jetlag again, for both our sakes!

    Like

    Reply
  6. Christine D'alessandro Avatar
    Christine D’alessandro

    NCFOM, no matter what people say, is a classic and needs to be seen. You may have to be in the mood, you may have to watch it a few times.. but it’ll grow on you – promise!
    You can buy it in all digital shapes and sizes (PC, ipod, mobile, etc) on http://www.iloaded.com

    Like

    Reply
  7. Rob @ Cynic Avatar
    Rob @ Cynic

    You accepting paid advertisers now eh NP? 🙂

    Like

    Reply
  8. Marcus Avatar
    Marcus

    Just picked up on this old love.
    I like what you have to say, and I don’t think Rob understood what you’re on about. Or maybe I didn’t.
    What I think your talking about here is not “talkability” as a strategic objective but the fact that the idea, is so strong or intriguing that it sparks the imagination in a way that its outside the realm of “sell” and “buy”.
    It’s just interesting.

    Like

    Reply
  9. Rob @ Cynic Avatar
    Rob @ Cynic

    I did get what NP was saying and I agree with what you’re saying Marcus, however on top of movies having a huge advantage over ads interms of the time they have to take someone on a journey … a movie rarely has the same commercial imperatives [ie: watch this to buy that] that an ad has. Sure it benefits from commercial extentions [ie: licensing], but they are rarely it’s primary focus.
    Without doubt intrigue and talkability are incredibly important and powerful components in communication and too rarely is it done well [too much emphasis on cheap gags than brain food] however [1] when adland does attempt it, it’s quite often for the creative/agencies personal ego fulfillment and [2] given approx 1% of all the movies actually made make real returns for the investors, I can see why clients would regard this as potentially being a high risk policy.
    Don’t get me wrong, it should be done but for it to stand a chance, approaching things with insight, maturity and interest is needed – because we can’t forget there is a commercial goal to achieve and there’s little place for self indulgence, which adland is still not that good at remembering.

    Like

    Reply
  10. Javier Bardem Avatar
    Javier Bardem

    It’s Javier not Havier

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment