Forgettable, and more
Advertiser: Nutrela
Baseline: Roz Kuch Naya, Roz Kuch Soya
Agency: Soho Square
4Ps B&M Take: First things first. The storyboard. A flashily dressed couple walks towards another couple in a park – who is obviously expecting them for a cozy picnic. The other couple compliments the man on his shirt sprinkled with printed flowers (really? compliment?) and the man cheekily tells them that it’s all thanks to his wife who is a fashion designer and therefore ‘Roz kuch naya’ (something new every day). The other couple smiles good-naturedly and offers them food. The man in the flowery shirt takes a bite and immediately says that he wants to kiss the hand of the lady who prepared such tasty food. That’s when the lady’s husband comes up with a repartee, saying he is married to a food designer and therefore ‘Roz kuch naya’. There’s no doubt that this ad was supposed to convey a positive message about Nutrela’s basic functional utility, putting out that it may be added to virtually all dishes being made in your kitchen to add more taste to them. But for all its intended positives, the ad comes out utterly hackneyed in its thinking. The subtle message seems to be that women (read wives) either have to be good clothes designers or good cooks for their husbands to appreciate them. And the not so subtle message that comes out is that money can be easily wasted in ads that will be forgotten before even this review ends. Soho Square really needs to pull its creative pants up if this is the best it can come up with for a brand that has slowly but surely built its place in the consumer’s mind. Now, which brand was it?
We want sex?
Advertiser: Samsung (Galaxy S4)
Baseline: We want four
Agency: Cheil India
4Ps B&M Take: Think of a number, any number. Fast! Now write it down. Look at it. Whatever number you thought of, well Johny boy, you’re wrong! The answer is apples… Didn’t make any sense, right? That’s the exact feeling you’ll get after watching this slipshod ad made minimalistically for one of the most new-age iconic brands, Samsung Galaxy S4. Not only does this ad seem too low on quality, one almost suspects that the ad was made on a poor man’s budget – the actors seem without makeup, the art direction seems municipal, the props are non-existent, and the storyline has just two statements (more of this later). What’s wrong with Samsung? Are they so out of money that Cheil could trade them this buffalo-class fare (thank you Mr. Tharoor)? And that too for, goddammit, S4, a product which we truly dig? Argh… Hear on. The ad opens with a rotund spectator (ostensibly at an IPL lookalike match) suddenly getting up and screaming himself hoarse, “We want six! We want six!…” Honestly, at first, it almost seems as if the chappie is screaming, “We want sex…” Obviously, that’s not the intent here. The dude notices that none of the other spectators are partaking of his glorious exuberance. And then worse, a solidly built spectator stands up, tears the poor guy’s ‘6’ placard, hands him a ‘4’ placard, and beckons him to start shouting, “We want four! We want four!…” And why? That’s not the point. Anything you say would be the wrong answer, unless you say Samsung Galaxy S4, the name of which appears for a millisecond and vanishes as fast. No product features told; no pricing economies sold, no differentiation offered. So why should you buy an S4? Because dude, you don’t want ‘sex’, do you? Doh…
Salman wins, we suffer
Advertiser: Dixcy Scott
Baseline: The Ultimate Winner (duh)
Agency: Makani Creatives
4Ps B&M Take: When will India learn to make tasteful innerwear ad? Well, check out the global H&M campaign that has soccer star Beckham. That sparkles with class. In contrast, ads for underwear in India are either too crude or simply beat around every bush – almost as though underwear is a dirty word to be brushed under a carpet at the first opportunity. The new advert from the Dixcy Scott stable is no different. It simply says everything about everything else – except the functional utility offered by the brand in question. Salman Khan is at this arm-wrestling competition – maybe or maybe not wearing Dixcy Scott underwear. He is obviously the macho man and is seen trashing one opponent after the other. Then a man walks into the club with his young son – his eye is on the cash prize on offer, ostensibly for the treatment of his child who is on crutches. The arm wrestling match begins. Salman is winning – obviously – and in desperation, the man’s eyes wander to his disappointed son standing on the sidelines. Salman’s sees the silent exchange, and voluntarily loses the match. Well, that might be heroic, sweet, sugary and every diabetic adjective you may think of, but remember Dixcy Scott? That’s the brand that paid Salman to lose the match… but there’s hardly much to show for it. Or is there?
