Post: #1

http://www.9news.com.au/world/2017/01/06...he-company

Quote:A German film student whose inspiring but unofficial spec commercial which went ignored by shoe manufacturer Adidas has received wide acclaim after he posted the video online.

Eugen Merher’s film “Adidas – Break Free”, depicts an elderly former marathon runner, troubled by his monotony life in a retirement home, discovering an old pair of Adidas sneakers.

The finding reignites his love of running and he attempts to leave the home, only to be repeatedly obstructed by staff, before finally escaping.

Mr Merher told The Huffington Post he attempted to send the video to Adidas’ communication department, which failed to react, prompting him to post it online last month instead.

The 26-year-old’s video has since received more than half a million views and won the praise of numerous YouTube users.

“This film has so much beauty, honesty and humanity,” one user wrote.

“Had me choked up at the end, well done,” another said.

The human resources, public relations, advertising, and general media divisions of multinationals are so incredibly bloated nowadays. And, to boot, they're staffed predominantly by women.

This guy submits his piece, which is clearly in the top 0.001% of commercials you will ever see by professionals, let alone film students, and it gets ignored in favor of earlier crap like this virtue-signalling:

"Adidas Encourages Star Athletes to Come Out"

"Adidas is paying schools to drop racist Native American mascots"

As an ROK writer, I keep abreast of all the mainstream media happenings, plus the zanier SJW bullshit. It is a testament to the inadequacies of these cucked corporations that their overpaid teams can't produce anything memorable, even when it's about bizarre support for kids who wanna be athletes and snip their genitalia to become girls.

Yes, this is just one proposal Adidas didn't bother responding to. But how fucked must the company be in terms of its politics to pass this over and opt for its normal pandering fare?

Post: #2

That commercial was excellent..... I hope it jumps starts a successful career for the maker.

Fuck Adidas.

Post: #3

WAIT, I FIGURED IT OUT!

Adidas declined to reply because:

- The student filmmaker Eugen wasn't Eugenia.
- He did not reference his cis-gender white male privilege at least three times through the commercial.
- The old man who wanted to run resisted female staff - multiple times.
- The ad didn't feature the German version of Jeffrey Tambor from Transparent.
- Elderly residents in the retirement home didn't have prominent photos of their gay, lesbian, and transgender grandchildren in their rooms.
- There were too many white East German people born in the 1940s featured.
- Not enough head female nurses were included (more than one of one head nurses needs to be female).
- The terribly menacing man in the wheelchair was assaulting the female stuff by obstructing them.

Post: #4

Dude watering his television @:24

Classic.

Post: #5

(01-07-2017 07:28 AM)david.garrett84 Wrote:  WAIT, I FIGURED IT OUT!

Adidas declined to reply because:

- The student filmmaker Eugen wasn't Eugenia.
- He did not reference his cis-gender white male privilege at least three times through the commercial.
- The old man who wanted to run resisted female staff - multiple times.
- The ad didn't feature the German version of Jeffrey Tambor from Transparent.
- Elderly residents in the retirement home didn't have prominent photos of their gay, lesbian, and transgender grandchildren in their rooms.
- There were too many white East German people born in the 1940s featured.
- Not enough head female nurses were included (more than one of one head nurses needs to be female).
- The terribly menacing man in the wheelchair was assaulting the female stuff by obstructing them.

Adidas declined to reply because the video depicts non-LGBT old White people having positive feelings and emotions, which doesn't, cannot, exist. Old White people, it's well-known, don't have a soul, unless they are Elton John, so: well-done Adidas!

Post: #6

I got choked up, I'll admit.

Of course they hate it, it is an old white man reclaiming his masculinity through his passion. Not only that, but old white people working together.

Fuck globalist corporate bullshit.

Post: #7

Why do people here care if Adidas didnt respond and why does the video maker care so much for adidas (he could take it to any running shoe maker).

All these big brands are the same, Nike, Adidas, Lous Vuitton, Hugo Boss Blah blah blah. None of them are cool. They would have to pay me a million to wear their logos.

Post: #8

AWESOME VID

BUT

(01-07-2017 07:16 AM)david.garrett84 Wrote:  As an ROK writer, I keep abreast of all the mainstream media happenings, plus the zanier SJW bullshit. It is a testament to the inadequacies of these cucked corporations that their overpaid teams can't produce anything memorable, even when it's about bizarre support for kids who wanna be athletes and snip their genitalia to become girls.

TOO MUCH POSTURING.

Post: #9

Maybe they didn't think it was that great, I didn't. If he can run why is he locked up in a nursing home?

Post: #10

One of the top comments:

Quote: They probably ignored it, because they prefer commercials with young, self-centric, multicultural hipsters, wearing fitness trackers, reaching fake goals while actually achieving nothing. But still, you know those hipsters will be posting about it on instagram, as if they were the special snowflake that deserves the attention

Our ideas are really gaining traction across the whole internet.

Post: #11

(01-07-2017 08:52 AM)aSimpNamedBrokeback Wrote:  Maybe they didn't think it was that great, I didn't. If he can run why is he locked up in a nursing home?

Post: #12

I can see why Adidas ignored it, I didn't think it was good either.

(01-07-2017 08:55 AM)Teedub Wrote:  Our ideas are really gaining traction across the whole internet.

What do you mean by "our ideas".

Post: #13

^ a few years ago it would have been an eyebrow raiser to see a comment like that on a non-red pill section of the internet, not so anymore.

Post: #14

(01-07-2017 08:52 AM)aSimpNamedBrokeback Wrote:  Maybe they didn't think it was that great, I didn't. If he can run why is he locked up in a nursing home?

That ad reminded me of a movie, "Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" - - mean nurse, old people being locked in a home, etc.

Post: #15

I don't get the "ignoring" thing. So, some random dude makes a random little video about shoes, and what? A huge corporation is supposed to do what? Are they supposed to buy the commercial and start airing it?

I don't understand the outrage, who would be the target audience for this commercial? Senior citizens who are healthy enough to run but have some type of mental disorder that wouldn't allow them to live alone?

If some random dude started doing my job for free, I wouldn't advertise it to the world. You guys are fucking retards if you think this commercial is being ignored because the main character is a white man expressing his masculinity and because it shows white people helping each other. Calm the fuck down and focus your energy on some real threat.

If you think your masculinity or race or whatever are under attack here need to fucking unplug from this shit for a while. The US presidential race, or whatever other propaganda you are binging on is rotting your damned brain.

Post: #16

(01-07-2017 08:43 AM)A.S Wrote:  TOO MUCH POSTURING.

This is your 18th post?

You're not going to last long around here.

Post: #17

Ivan's got a point. Most advertising is targeted. Usually the person you see depicted in the advert, print or TV commercial, is whom the ad meant to attract and hopefully sell to(ad has Asian guy in it they're trying to sell to Asian Men)

Let's be serious, how many White Male Senior citizens are dying to be marathon runners? Adidas probably realized that while those Seniors may have lots of money, there aren't enough of them to justify the cost large-scale ad campaign.

It was a well-thought out, creative ad(he should make this into a short film). But ads aren't judged on their creativity. They're judged on their ability to sell; ads aren't art. This one's looking for a nearly non-existent target demographic so therefore it's a shitty ad.

That's it.

There's no globalist boogeyman targeting straight White Men stopping them from doing anything, OP. Adidas passed because they wouldn't get much money from it.

Post: #18

(01-07-2017 12:06 PM)Goldin Boy Wrote:  Ivan's got a point. Most advertising is targeted. Usually the person you see depicted in the advert, print or TV commercial, is whom the ad meant to attract and hopefully sell to(ad has Asian guy in it they're trying to sell to Asian Men)

Let's be serious, how many White Male Senior citizens are dying to be marathon runners? Adidas probably realized that while those Seniors may have lots of money, there aren't enough of them to justify the cost large-scale ad campaign.

It was a well-thought out, creative ad(he should make this into a short film). But ads aren't judged on their creativity. They're judged on their ability to sell; ads aren't art. This one's looking for a nearly non-existent target demographic so therefore it's a shitty ad.

That's it.

There's no globalist boogeyman targeting straight White Men stopping them from doing anything, OP. Adidas passed because they wouldn't get much money from it.

Alright, so how many actual Adidas customers were being targeted by the LGBT or anti-Indian mascot payments madness it has engaged in? Because leftist hipsters don't wear their gear. All this virtue-signalling I mentioned appeals to leftist whites, the people least likely to buy Adidas.

There is something woefully wrong when corporate media and advertising teams (particularly the people who head them and gain from new hits, regardless of where they come from), not to mention executives, think the LGBT and Indian mascot shit will sell their product, but ads like this are not even considered.

So, yes, these people live in a bubble and they are peddling politically correct codswallop on a regular basis.

I said the corporations were cucked, not conspiratorial. And they are cucked when it comes to showing ads about certain folks. They're too focused on pandering to the 3-4% of people who are gay/lesbian, the 0.5% who want to "change" their gender or supposedly have, the hipsters, and minorities (which really centers on what the corporations think are "minority issues", thus encompassing only a subsection of minority opinions). Saying this doesn't make me or anyone else criticizing either an ardent white nationalist or a member of the more racially extreme wing of the alt-right.

Ivan, as for your post, you're assuming that the target market matches only the people depicted in the advertisement - old people and middle-aged or nearing middle-aged medical staff. By that logic, any ad featuring a severely handicapped person won't resonate ever with the 98.5% of people who aren't severely handicapped. Half of the time, the kinds of people in the ad do not matter at all - the emotions do.

Whether you love or hate the ad, it's relatively deep. Reducing it to only being able to appeal to old folks in old folks' homes dreaming nostalgically of long-gone youth is rather ridiculous given the waves across many demographics it has made this week.

As for the "doing my job for free thing", that is not how marketing and advertising works for Nike at least. I can't comment on Adidas. The people who scout ideas or are responsible for administering creative teams have every incentive for picking a successful advertising campaign.

Post: #19

(01-07-2017 10:40 AM)IvanDrago Wrote:  I don't get the "ignoring" thing. So, some random dude makes a random little video about shoes, and what? A huge corporation is supposed to do what? Are they supposed to buy the commercial and start airing it?

I don't understand the outrage, who would be the target audience for this commercial? Senior citizens who are healthy enough to run but have some type of mental disorder that wouldn't allow them to live alone?

If some random dude started doing my job for free, I wouldn't advertise it to the world. You guys are fucking retards if you think this commercial is being ignored because the main character is a white man expressing his masculinity and because it shows white people helping each other. Calm the fuck down and focus your energy on some real threat.

If you think your masculinity or race or whatever are under attack here need to fucking unplug from this shit for a while. The US presidential race, or whatever other propaganda you are binging on is rotting your damned brain.

It is just like some "red pillers" on here are not better than the feminists they try to fight against.

Post: #20

(01-07-2017 10:40 AM)IvanDrago Wrote:  I don't understand the outrage, who would be the target audience for this commercial?

(01-07-2017 12:06 PM)Goldin Boy Wrote:  Ivan's got a point. Most advertising is targeted.

...

Let's be serious, how many White Male Senior citizens are dying to be marathon runners? Adidas probably realized that while those Seniors may have lots of money, there aren't enough of them to justify the cost large-scale ad campaign.

...

This one's looking for a nearly non-existent target demographic so therefore it's a shitty ad.

Oh, for fuck's sake. A shitty ad?! One that makes news around the world, despite not even being used by its corporate recipient?

Guys, stop bandying around the term "target market" as if you really know what it means and how it works.

Your argument is basically, "The ad has old people and it can't be a good ad because old people rarely buy Adidas." Meanwhile, this guy will get 20 million views of his "bad" ad, that didn't even become an official ad, by the end of 2017.

The student filmmaker's own upload has already gotten 5 million views (yes, for a SPEC AD) in basically three or four days. It was posted mid-December but took off after the New Year.

The massive publicity this video piece has gotten is entirely demonstrative of why Adidas should have chosen it.

The vast majority of people talking about it are young people, Adidas' meta-market.

Post: #21

(01-07-2017 01:00 PM)david.garrett84 Wrote:  Your argument is basically, "The ad has old people and it can't be a good ad because old people rarely buy Adidas."
.

No, it's "it has old people, I'm not trying to rock shoes that are marketed to my grandma".

Post: #22

(01-07-2017 11:58 AM)Surreyman Wrote:  

(01-07-2017 08:43 AM)A.S Wrote:  TOO MUCH POSTURING.

This is your 18th post?

You're not going to last long around here.

There are three posters in this thread who likely won't make it to 50 posts.

Post: #23

Another reason Adidas may not have wanted to use this ad is its length. Your standard commercial is 30 seconds long; I doubt they budget for, or have any desire to pay the cost of airing one that's 99 seconds.

Either way it's a massive stretch to try and relate this to the two stories linked in the original post.

Post: #24

I really liked the advert ; Also a lot of these big sports brands go in for "aspirational" marketing - the advert is a good example of aspirational material since it shows how an old man breaks free of his shackles and goes on to do what he loves.. and therefore is very relevant to the young demographic even though it features old people.

That being said, we have no idea how many such adverts Adidas gets sent by people, and whether they even have dedicated personnel to look at such submissions. Just because an advert is good doesn't mean that an organization is morally/ethically bound to buy it, I don't get why people are hating on Adidas. Sure its a very good ad and has generated decent buzz on social media, but hindsight is always 20/20. Most people in Adidas probably don't even have creative control over big advertising, perhaps the leadership outsources advertising to a third party advertising firm. The kid could've sent it to Nike, or Reebok, or UnderArmor or any other relevant competitor as well (I personally think the style and message is more fitting of Nike's adverts). Hopefully the guy is able to parlay all of this attention into a successful career, but shaming an organization for certain business decisions, while understandable on his part, is not a sentiment I support.

Post: #25

(01-07-2017 01:31 PM)Wahawahwah Wrote:  ...but shaming an organization for certain business decisions, while understandable on his part, is not a sentiment I support.

I understand you to a degree. Yes, hindsight is always hindsight.

Yet after the LGBT and other SJW madness Adidas has spouted in recent times, they should be shamed. They have clearly spent too much time appeasing SJW interest groups. No surprise that they missed this guy.