Natureta: Gentleman

For a dinner with style.

Advertising Agency: SAATCHI & SAATCHI, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Creative Director: Matej Kodric
Art Director: Tanja Bercon Potic
Copywriters: Matej Kodric, Irena Marcetic
Photographer: Riccardo Callin
Other additional credits: Spela Petac, Matjaz Skufca

August 2008


crisis's picture
189 pencils

Why is the tomato angled like that? It works for the car ad, since it's moving in a direction, but seems weird here.

brain123's picture
830 pencils

Student work (1st Semester)

sneakyhands's picture
1857 pencils

agreed. no on the alternating tags too.

regrat's picture
304 pencils

mr. brain could you show me some profesional work. so that i know, when i look at a profesional work. i an so sick of these "student work" comments.

these ads are not cool. but i hate the student work lable. and i hate label done. if you say done, prove it.

brain123's picture
830 pencils

Dear Drago,

You can be sick all you want, but it won't stop the "student work" or the "done" comments. So, deal with it.
In my case, I rather not complaining about it and even use those comments when I consider them to fit (such as this case).
Now, you're a copywriter like me, and unless you are Junior you should be able to recognize "student work" when you see it.
But if you are not, you will see professional work in any ARCHIVE magazine or One Show book.

Best regards.

ivan's picture

How do you define student work?

This is most definitely not student work. It's done by ad pros at a respectable organization. Not by students.

brain123's picture
830 pencils

I never said it was done by students, it just looks like it. I used to work for this particular organization and I know their creative work should be more clever, polished and fresh. I'm sorry if I offended any susceptibilities, but is just my opinion and it should be taken for what it is, an opinion.

capywriter's picture
5509 pencils

I don't think these are bad at all. Agree about the positioning of the tomato... But these ads are simple and talking to the customer in a an understandable way. I'm sure it will make 90% of the common people have a smile on their face, not saying they'll roll over the floor laughing, but they'll appreciate it. It uses the product in a nice way. Job done!
Stop trying to make things so complex just to be 'creative'.

brain123's picture
830 pencils

You are right, but most of us login to sites like this to be updated and amazed by the creativity level that has been reached around the world. We can see this kind of ads every day in local newspapers or magazines, so why bother seen them here too?
Am I getting updated? NO. Am I amazed? HELL NO!

uday davara's picture
uday davara
2 pencils

it's not a agency work.
do something friend.

STRTLRS's picture
1601 pencils

This is not as bad as some of the creative wannabes in here want to portray it. The perspective on the tomato is a non issue since it almost looks like it is taking a bow. The tomato is the perfect compliment to the bow tie pasta. The only issue I have art direction wise is the overuse of the reflection thing and the color scheme on the background. A softer white background would have made that tomato sing. Don't care much for the italicized garamond either. Product placement's a little odd; just a stylized label would have done it. So my verdict: CD 8, AD 5. Student work? no. Does it sell: yes. That's what matters. Ogilvy anyone?

That's what I call constructive criticism. Please don't come in here pretending to be more creative than the rest of the universe. Sorry your "brain" is too big for this site. This is called "ads of the world" not "ads that are so creative they will blow your socks off". Sorry you're not getting "updated", whatever that means.

I think, therefore... yeah.

brain123's picture
830 pencils

Ogilvy is dead, remember?

Now. I don't pretend anything and my brain isn't any bigger than the rest of the people here. Like the ones who seem to agree with me, the ones who don't or the ones who try to teach the rest of the universe what constructive criticism is.

QUOTED ABOVE: "Ads of the World is a commercial advertising archive and community showcasing THE BEST AND MOST INTERESTING creative work worldwide".

That's why I login to this site every morning at the office. I do like ads that "blow my socks off" cause they drive me to work harder (this is what "updated" means) and when I'm underwhelmed by a few ads here I'm entitled to express it.

Once again, I apologize for my words hurting anybody's feelings, specially yours, since apparently and without intending to, they made you feel less creative. I'll try to be more thoughtful next time.

STRTLRS's picture
1601 pencils

To disregard someone's ideals just because they're dead is simply absurd. Let's forget everything Einstein and Picasso have taught us, they're dead so they don't matter.

Two bodies can't occupy the same space; your ego is growing therefore you brain is shrinking.

I think, therefore... yeah.

brain123's picture
830 pencils

Oh come on man, don't be ridiculous, this is advertising!

I doubt a client came to Einstein and asked him: "Can we use Comic Sans on that formula?", or asked Picasso: "Could you make your signature bigger on that painting?". All those guys made a huge contribution to society but life goes on. Physics didn't stop with Einstein, Art didn't stop with Picasso and advertising CERTAINLY didn't stop with Ogilvy.

FYI, it was Saatchi & Saatchi's CEO Kevin Roberts who said "Ogilvy is dead!". Well, actually he said: "Ogilvy is fucking dead!", I just don't like to curse. I wasn't disregarding his ideals, in fact I think they are great. I just believe they belong to the great advertising of the past; a past without media innovation, consumer research development or even internet. A past where we couldn't possibly be having this discussion.

Nowadays, if you publish an ad which is a simple white page with a black font headline that says: "2x1 SALE! on toilet paper at your closest supermarket". IT WILL SELL. Is it creative? NO. Entertaining? NO. Does it create an emotional bond between the audience and the brand? NO. REASON never leads to loyalty and the real money for companies comes from loyal frequent costumers, not the new ones who tried the brand because of a single purchase opportunity.

Do you really think Coca Cola is only trying to sell you a can of soda?

And by the way, the brain shrinking caused by the enlargement of it's ego is a biological impossibility.
Keep working on your sarcastic metaphors.

STRTLRS's picture
1601 pencils

Point taken, but not entirely understood. I'll have to disagree with the "great advertising of the past" line. Half of the stuff on this website relies on gimmicky photoshop effects to get the point across because it lacks substance. A lot of the stuff here doesn't stack up to the "the past". You don't see iconic characters like Tony The Tiger and Green Giant being created nowadays because people don't take time to think and create a branding universe. They just want to do the "in" thing and throw all the tried and true rules our the window. Coca-Cola wasn't born yesterday, it was born in a more distant "past" and great advertising minds from that "past" made it what it is today. Oh, and "if you publish an ad which is a simple white page with a black font headline that says: "2x1 SALE! on toilet paper at your closest supermarket". IT WILL SELL". It will. You're pitching to an already captive audience who is willing to drop some cash. You need 0% advertising at that point.

Getting some sense into your brain is proving to be a biological impossibility. (not a metaphor).

I think, therefore... yeah.

brain123's picture
830 pencils

Sense has been there always, you just manage not to see it, that's all.

Off course you disagree with the "great advertising of the past" line. Clearly we both have different, yet valid, points of view. Obviously you are an advertising melancholic, and it is OK. If it works for you, terrific. I just choose trying to look always forward and not backwards.

What you say about a branding universe is very true, but we can't rely on characters or catchy phrases and expect to get away with it for ever. I mean, those characters are brand gimmicks at their purest form. If we threw all the "tried and true rules" out the window must be because they don't work so well anymore. The worldwide industry can't be all wrong at the same time just because you say it. Maybe those brand universes you talk about have mutated into something else, they don't have to be iconic -specially not now with the saturated markets and all the imitators out there- they just need to have a distinctive feeling to them.

Yes, Coca Cola was born in a more distant past. Yes, great minds of that past built the super brand that it is today (like we all didn't know that already). Yes, they did a very good job, but if you could bring those guys from the past to work on Coca Cola today, they probably couldn't keep up. Now it's a different arena, the goal isn't to be on top, but to stay there. One again, I'm not disregarding their great work, I'm focusing on what it takes to do the same great work today.

The "white page experiment" was just an illustrative example in order to explain myself, you took it literal. Nevertheless, what captive audience? Isn't any audience (captive or not) willing to drop some cash at some point? You think people plan every cent they spend? Do you plan them? I mean, they make those crappy infomercials and play them all day long for some reason, right?

Anyway, that's not important. What matters is, brands need to be as close to the people as possible. It's not about what a brand have to say but what the people want to hear. Brands need to become part of our lives and keep the rhythm. Some good brands we have inherited, but in the future we will probably need new different products and new different brands. The consumer paradigm is shifting constantly. We are not mass consumers anymore because we all think we are unique. And we are right; now we demand to be treated as special individuals, not "money spending creatures".

I hope you see I'm passed the sarcasm and moving to a healthy discussion.

STRTLRS's picture
1601 pencils

Yeah, you could cut the sarcasm in here with a butter knife... Healthy is good.

I understand the point you're trying to make and no, I'm not an advertising puritan or anything like that. In fact, I'm all for trying new things and making/breaking the rules if needed. Those branding universes you say have mutated are very much still alive today; some companies just do it better than others. I only have to watch the first 5 seconds of a Target ad to know it's a Target ad. Same for any Apple ad or even Geico with its lizard character. Companies like those are dominating today because they built a universe around their brands which they protect through consistency throughout the years. So in my opinion, characters or recognizable faces aren't "brand gimmicks", they're simply extensions that will make your brand more memorable. All I'm saying is, I feel advertising today is getting more and more diluted and disposable. Don't get me wrong, there's stellar work out there that kicks the ass of anything done in the "great advertising of the past", but going back to Ogilvy, "does it sell?". It's probably time to hit the advertising archives...

I think, therefore... yeah.

brain123's picture
830 pencils

Finally we're starting to understand each other.

Once again, yes and no. Let's be honest, not every brand can afford use one of those characters or recognizable faces. Or at least they can't start doing it right now (if they are well known) cause it wouldn't be believable. Could you put a brand character to PlayStation (something like "ULI the happy Ork")?? or Guinness Beer?? I don't think so.

Both PlayStation and Guinness do killer advertising, creative as hell. Do they sell? YEAH, pretty much...

If we start hitting the advertising archives should be ONLY for reference, never because we all advertisers screwed up so bad that we need to go back 50 years.

It will probably sell but I still think this pasta sauce ad looks like student work... : )
(that was a joke... I don't want to start this all over again...)

Slashweasel's picture
104 pencils

1992 called. It wants its ad back.

shahidali's picture
4069 pencils

u must be a copywriter...well said...


whitespace's picture
1953 pencils

I like it.

corellka's picture
54 pencils

I really like it.
this ad is really outstanding for me.
Not for a "highend" execution or for a "economist clear headline" but just beacause it is so clear and nice.
Direct and easy at the same time.
I see a GOLD winner in it.

Log in or register to post comments