Sunday, February 05, 2006

Super Bowl; commercial reviews

Let’s first dispense with the formalities of the 40th Super Bowl, a poorly played game that Pittsburgh won (actually, it was a game Seattle lost by failing to convert scoring opportunities).
Here is my review of the package of Super Bowl commercials, also, for the most part, disappointing and nondescript.
The first best commercials were:
5) FedEx “prehistoric.” I laughed, which was rare during the breaks.
4) Hummer “little monster.” Clever interaction between classic Japanese cinematic monsters. So that’s why we have all those gas guzzling tanks on the road?
3) Budweiser “card section.” Well done. You could see the punch line but it was a pleasure getting there.
2) (tie) Budweiser “young Clydesdale colt,” and “streaker.” The streaker was the funniest commercial on the night.
and 1) ABC’s own promotion, “Addicted to Lost.” It was the cleverist spot, with the best use of editing, best use of rock music, best use of enticement to the viewer.
Hands down the individual winner.
Career Builder.com and Budweiser had the best grouping of commercials. Budweiser was far better than its partner, Bud Light, whose commercials were mostly crude and rude. In fact, I hope people think there’s as much “crude” in ANWR as was shown on screen Sunday night.
I like Career Builder because … monkeys ARE funny.
Bud Light lacked wit and Cedric the Entertainer. His presence was notably absent.
Other notable things were the return of old familiar faces (Leonard Nimoy for … Aleve? and Richard Dean Anderson as MacGyver for Mastercard) and the fact that there is better rock music in these commercials than can be programmed on any classic rock station.
And just HOW many razor blades does it take to shave a guy? FIVE?
The Diet Pepsi/P Diddy spot was far too hip for old guy me.
Of the movie previews, I thought “Mission Impossible 3,” “V for Vendetta” and the Pixar film, “Cars” looked promising. But Paul Newman doing animated stuff? Is that NOT another sign that the apocalypse is approaching?

No comments: