Here’s a thing that always used to fascinate John Webster.
The corny done brilliantly.
He was fascinated because you just didn’t see it.
So he identified a massive opportunity.
Take Leo Burnett in Chicago.
They had a massive agency built out of unashamedly corny advertising.
Like The Jolly Green Giant.
Or Tony the Tiger.
What breakfast cereal was he advertising?
I remember he always said, “They’re GREEE-EEAAA-AATTT”
And I’m sure it wasn’t Rice Crispies.
(I think that was three other corny little guys called SNAP CRACKLE & POP, wasn’t it?)
Maybe it was Kellogg Sugar Frosties, Tony the Tiger advertised.
The point is, I’ve been seeing that advertising for decades.
The character is so powerful I remember him even though I don’t remember the product.
But I go into a supermarket and I don’t have to, because he’s all over the box.
So, without even knowing the name of the product, I can buy that brand.
The character is bigger than the product.
The commercials were always pretty badly written.
Tiger does pratfall from surfboard, roller skates, skis, BMX, or whatever research shows kids are into.
Then gets up and delivers the mnemonic to camera.
Corny.
But the ads worked and people loved the character.
Now John’s fascination with this kind of advertising was as follows.
If these characters are so powerful when they’re not even well written, imagine how powerful they’d be if they were well written.
At that time the ads had the emotional appeal of a cute lovable character.
But that was all they had.
Imagine if they were written with wit and style, and you could add intelligence to emotion.
How good would that be?
Well, you tell me, how good was it?
Here’s some of John’s list, and everything on it won awards:
The Honey Monster.
Cresta Bear.
The Smash Martians.
The Hoffmeister Bear.
Arkwright.
The Humphries.
All absolutely brilliant on any scale of measurement.
Rational or emotional.
And to prove the point, reverse the process.
BMP lost Sugar Puffs to Y&R.
So Y&R had to carry on the Honey Monster campaign.
Look at the commercials John had previously written and made.
Funny, witty, intelligent.
In fact, the entire campaign won a D&AD silver.
Not bad for a fluffy children’s character to impress a snooty D&AD jury.
Now look at what Y&R did with it.
You see John’s creation is still there, but nothing else.
Honey Monster is now shorn of wit and intelligence.
Just another lumbering character that has to end every commercial with a prat fall and mnemonic to camera.
So you see, like John, we can all learn from corny advertising.
Because even in that, there’s something that works.
You just have to be clever enough, like John, to work out what that is.
Then keep that and throw away the rest.
-
Subscribe
-
Archive
-
Recent comments
- On 30 July Conor commented on JUST BECAUSE WE'RE ALL EQUAL, DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE ALL THE SAME: "Maybe you did Kevin. I'm pretty sure I'm the descendant of a highly advanced extraterrestrial being who showed the Egyptians ..."
- On 29 July dave commented on WHY DO WE KEEP TALKING TO OURSELVES?: "Hi Kevin, A couple of things that could be interesting about cricket, for me, concern the bowling. Number one is the spin ..."
- On 29 July Kevin Gordon commented on JUST BECAUSE WE'RE ALL EQUAL, DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE ALL THE SAME: "None of us are equal. It's diversity that makes life so interesting. just look at all the different comments. And we don't even ..."
- On 29 July Kevin Gordon commented on MORAL RELATIVISM IS MORE CREATIVE: "Personally, I love The Desiderata. "
- On 29 July Kevin Gordon commented on WHY DO WE KEEP TALKING TO OURSELVES?: "Two of my uncles were in the 8th army during world war two. They often had a fry-up on a tank. However, ..."
-
Twitter
RSS Feed
Twitter
Email
After reading “Here?s a thing that always used to fascinate John Webster.The corny done brilliantly.” I instantly remembered Leo Burnett’s words, “Let?s do the obvious thing ? the common thing ? but let?s do it uncommonly well.” …And then you continued by mentioning Leo Burnett. Nice, it means his philosophy really walked with the light on.
And John Webster surely understood that if you brilliantly talk about simple things there’s no one left outside. Everybody can understand what you’re saying, but the bonus is that some people will take it further, add meaning and personal interpretation, adjust it to suit them. Simple things are friendly and never discriminate.
I mentioned this on one of my blogs a while ago, but another difference was the lovable shoddiness of HM in John’s day. When I was given the brief at Y&R (never got an ad made, thank God), we were told he had four ‘hair wranglers’ just to make sure his fur was right. Then he started breakdancing with Boyzone and now he rips off The Mighty Boosh. John must be gyroscoping in his grave.
Hi Ben.
I think it’s like when you see the remakes of Michael Caine movies (Get Carter, Alfie, The Italian Job) it just makes the original look even better.
I saw Sleuth’s remake a couple of days ago. Even with Caine involved it did exactly what you said. I look forward to a remake of Jaws 4 or The Swarm.
For Sleuth you so badly need two great actors, not only one, because the whole film is about the interaction between them. This is obviously not the case with Michael Caine and Jude Law, the second still having a long way to go until being able to respond to Caine’s great talent. There’s an energy loss somewhere.
“Corny doesn’t have to mean bad”
I agree with this. everyone is so focused on doing something coooool these days, that they forget to do something likeable, or charming, or populist.
Advertising used to feel like it was done by good ‘normal’ folk, but now seems lost up it’s own arsepipe, done to please its creators egos, not its audience.
Dave: Nice post.
But may I suggest that you are overlooking something very important: corny is in the eye of the beholder.
So for the American children to whom the Tony The Tiger ads are aimed at, he’s not corny at all. Just cool. Similarly, they would likely find things you call “well written” to be obtuse and boring.
Or, as someone wise once told me years ago “There’s a reason “America’s Funniest Home Videos” is a top 10 show.” (And a look at the most popular videos on YouTube would seem to bear him out.)
Look at “Ratatouille” the Disney movie about the haute cuisine loving rat that won all sorts of raves from (adult) critics. But kids were by and large indifferent. Why? Because the idea of “being true to your art” is not something that makes any sense to an 8 year old and the world of French haute cuisine holds little interest for that audience as well.
Which is not to say we should be producing crap. There’s stuff that walks the line between art and corny and appeals to audiences at many levels. It’s also, imho, the toughest kind of work to create.
Absolutely Alan.
I think the best example of what we’re both talking about would be The Simpsons.
It’s cute and colourful and simple enough for children to love.
And on another level it has cultural references that may even be too sophisticated for some adults (e.g. Ockham’s Razor).
But you don’t sacrifice one for the other.
Get it right and they feed off each other.
I find the attitude of a lot of young so-called ‘creatives’ is like Mao’s Red Guard.
You must blindly accept the word of the leader and to question it is treason, like 1984.
(In this case awards is the leader’s word.)
I think to beat someone, you have to find out what they’re doing that works, then do it better.
So I’d analyse what works about bad work, take it and do it better.
That’s what John Webster always did.
…And if we zoom out even more, isn’t it the same thing that happens with all that fight between creatives and planners, creativity vs. strategy and so on? Genius work is always about balance. And it’s no news and no secret, that’s the universal model, at least the one that applies to the universe we live in, it is energy conservation we’re talking about. Want to have more here? Accept having less there. The genius nature resides in keeping a perfect balance. If you need them both, feed them both.
isn’t there also just an element of cowardice in adhering to current notions of cool? it’s just not very adventurous in the UK right now for example, to churn out yet another wordless visual epic.
how is “gavin and stacey” perceived over there? that’s good populist TV IMHO. it does a lot of tricky things well. but i could well imagine luvvie eyes rolling at the notion that it’s worth emulating.
The Michael Caine re-makes brings up, to me, an interesting point. Seems Hollywood and Tin Pan Alley are perfectly happy to re-shoot and re-record shows. In advertising, come even close to doing a campaign that bears slight resemblance to something already done, and you’re at once accused of copying.
Not that I think copying is right. Just amazes me how directors, actors, music producers and singers are allowed to offer sincere flattery to other people without being accused.
@dave & @anca: Yes and yes.
Nice to find kindred spirits.
Great post, Dave, and good build from Anca. Taking the familiar and making it new… that’s what we do. Sometimes I like to call it ‘milking a cliche’.