The Matchbox Calendar
ivan | Fri, 2010-08-13 17:16If you're reading AotW regularly you must remember the student work created by Breno Costa and Guilherme Souza from Brother Ad School, Buenos Aires, Argentina for Matchbox featuring sexy barbie dolls.
Once the young creatives saw how well the spec campaign was received they decided to take it further. Now, there is a website for the project and they refined the execution of the calendar with better photography. Enjoy the toy porn, click the image above for a larger image.
- ivan's blog
- Login or register to post comments
18 Comments
Sexy Barbie Dolls? Sorry, looks like child pornography to me.
Oh, please. Nudity does equal child porn, let alone naked Barbie dolls. If that's where your mind goes, I think it says more about you than this idea—how do you know what child porn looks like?
I think you said it: nudity DOES equal.. Maybe you should correct your post. In this case, it does equal what I said. But feel free to use that calendar if you like.
Posts are not editable, but I'll reiterate for clarity. Nudity and pornography are two entirely different thungs. Do you consider Playboy photos pornography? What about the Sports illustrated swimsuit issue, or maxim magazine. Where do you draw the line between nudity and pornography?
Also, Barbie is supposed to be an adult, so even if this depicted intercourse or overtly lewd poses—which it dorsn't—it would not constitute "child pornography".
And you avoided my last question: how you do you know what child pornography looks like?
Barbie is a DOLL used by LITTLE GIRLS. It is not an object used by adult people. You are defending this tacky project so passionately as if you were behind it. To me those plastic dolls do not look like grown women; they look like minors. I still think it would be inappropriate for a grown man to use this calendar. But if YOU happen to be a grown man and since you love it, feel free to put it up in your bedroom or, better, office. Finally, Playboy, Maxim, etc are considered softcore pornography (google the term). Also, you do not need to have seen something to know what it is. (I think this answers your question).
I didn't work on this project, but I am taking issue with your clasifiying it as child pornography. Do you think the creatives and photographer here should be arrested for such a heinous crime? I'm fascinated to understand how you can equate this funny little calendar of naked dolls with one if the most vile aspects of mankind. You seem unable to distinguish the differences between nudity, erotica, soft core, hardcore or child pornography. Even when we're talking about dolls that don't even have nipples or genitals and aren't engaging in sexual acts. I don't think there could be a bigger dissonance between this project and what you're equating it to. It's like saying a married man checking out another woman on the street is tantamount to cheating on his wife with her.
"you do no need to see something to know what it is". No, but you do need to see something to know what it LOOKS like and your original post says "looks like child pornography to me."
It's always the ostensible prudes and the politicians who deride these sorts of things that are actually the most twisted behind closed doors. Hence my suspicion of curiosity about you.
I fell asleep halfway thru your post. Thank you for your contributions to this topic.
Are you really that stupid?
What do you think this is, art? If so, this shouldn't be displayed in a site called "ads of the world".
It's advertising, its objective should be to sell something to someone. What does it sell? Nothing, I guess, but your line of thought seems to me extremely naive.
I agree with u
I thought matchbox was a magazine for adults at first, that has the same name as the toy brand. Apparently, I was wrong.
Good idea, but off-target.
I'm confused.
Write a wise saying and your name will live forever – Anonymous.
http://www.anonymousauthor.co.nz
www.twitter.com/@anonauth
This is both hilarious and a little scary at the same time. It certainly gets your attention but I wouldn't want any kids to see it. I'll give them an A for creativity and an F for family friendly.
Brett Relander
http;//TacticalMarketingLabs.com
No. It's not only wrong, but also stupid.
It's not wrong. It's not stupid. It's not porn.
They're dolls.
It's about context. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
Thats a very supurb art piece....Wish i coud hv thought of this barbie callender for matchbox ..... Plz Ignor the idiots like atb2005 who feels like its a child pornography..... ask thm to F#X* @%$........This will sure be a winner for cannes ad festival & one show.
It's not wrong. It's not stupid........But its awasom....... It's not porn.
They're dolls.
It's about context. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
This will b a winner.
rubbish piece to exhibit
awesome, thanks for links to a great site Rob x
escort-marketing-guru.com