As we work to bring even more value to our audience, we’ve made important changes for those who receive Ad Age with our compliments. As of November 15, 2016 we will no longer be offering full digital access to AdAge.com. However, we will continue to send you our industry-leading print issues focused on providing you with what you need to know to succeed.
If you’d like to continue your unlimited access to AdAge.com, we invite you to become a paid subscriber. Get the news, insights and tools that help you stay on top of what’s next.
Here's a Keds spread, seen in Glamour. It's got a cute TV star, a cute dog and a lecture on intolerance. Is this being cool? Rate the ad on the Rate the Ad-o-mometer's six-degree scale of excellence, with 5 being the top score: 5 World-changing, 4 Great, 3 Good, 2 Fair, 1 Forgettable, 0 Actively Annoying. And feel free to comment on the art direction, the photography, the copy, the typography, whatever. Click the ad to play.
Last week's Rate the Ad. The inevitable vibrator jokes aside, the Schick Quattro, which has four blades and a battery — not to be confused with the Audi Quattro, which has four wheels and a battery — baffled almost everyone with its Power angle. What's the battery for? Well, Energizer owns Schick; if Tyson owned Schick it would've been four blades and a chicken, OK? Beyond that, the battery was generally seen as a dubious innovation, particularly when running blades over one's neck, not helped by the fact that it's "near the head," except when making suggestive jokes. As for the suggestive headline, it suggested greatness to some and bad '70s porn to others, while the Bauhaus and brushed metal look was generally found irritating, though there are people who do think this ad is cool. However, there are only enough of them for a Good/Bad ratio, using the four tiers/two tiers handicap split, of a stubbly 42/58 on the Rate the Ad-o-mometer — which is actually not bad around here, where everyone has a surly five o'clock shadow, and in fact it beats the Bowlmor babes of two weeks ago. Anyway, here are the results.
5 World-changing 1%
4 Great 4%
3 Good 17%
2 Fair 20%
1 Forgettable 38%
0 Actively Annoying 20%
And here are some of our fave responses.
2 I like the copy, but the art doesn't support it.
1 What's with the metal cutting board background?
3 Sweet visual composition; unfortunately the typeface makes me cringe.
1 You have to be pretty lonely to think a razor is going to get you more "stroking" time.
3 Tiny budget, ridiculously unnecessary product. Pretty good under the circumstances.
3 Terrible font choice aside, this is actually not a bad example of how to market a totally unnecessary product.
1 This "shaving instrument" is an especially ugly-ass razor; it looks like a sneaker.
2 A clumsy placement of the razor on a background it wasn't photographed on. Is it a photograph or an animation?
0 Could they try any harder to convince us that this latest, greatest razor will get you laid? Does anyone really believe this shit?
4 Classic "product as hero" ad with a real headline. A dying breed.
1 I know anytime I've had a razor gliding across my throat I've thought to myself, I wish this thing were vibrating.
4 Any ad with the word "stroke" in it is bound to get a guy's attention.
3 STROKED got my attention!
1 Where to start? The cheeseball line or the ugly-ass typography?
3 I like the metallic background and type with the Sex in the City copy,
3 Unlike Gillette, Schick doesn't rate the addition of another blade to its razor alongside the splitting of the atom. For that, at least, we must be thankful.
1 Big whup. Gillette already has the five-blade, battery-powered Fusion. Show me a 20-blade razor next time ...
0 Not particularly confident, are we. "Most likely stroked." With that kind of confidence, I "most likely" won't be buying this product.
Call for Entries
Creativity's May 2006 Advertising/Design Annual
Send us your best print and outdoor ads, posters, collateral, brand ID, annual reports, promotions, graphic design and packaging from 2005. Submissions Guidelines: Send on CD ONLY, no e-mail submissions. Do not include actual paper ads or any paper text materials with your submission. File specs: 300 dpi, CMYK or RGB. File types: .pdf, .eps, .tif, or .jpg are acceptable but uncompressed jpeg files are recommended. Minimum image size: 5x7. NO Zip or Stuffit archive files will be accepted. Complete credits and a brief explanation of the strategy/execution of the project MUST be included on the CD in a Word doc, along with details of any awards the work might have won, as well as phone and e-mail contact info.
Send submissions on a single disc to: Terry Kattleman, May Annual, Creativity Magazine, 711 Third Ave., New York, NY 10017. Work must have appeared in 2005. No spec work or student work will be considered. Foreign submissions are encouraged. No more than THREE campaigns/projects per company/office will be considered. There is NO fee for submissions. Work must be submitted by March 31, 2006.