Greenpeace: Hacking Disney

Advertising Agency: Studio Smack, Netherlands


Dzsoi's picture
6440 pencils

I think only 30 secs (and less than 391.288 species) would have get the point across just as well. It gets extremely boring.

kleenex's picture
34570 pencils

I think the length is not bad at all. 30 seconds would be too short. The end though is bad.

Dzsoi's picture
6440 pencils

Did you have any doubt what will happen with the animals coming after 20-30 secs? Nothing surprising or spectacular happens in the last minute.
Animals disappearing is not that hard to connect with nature conservation so I would say the pay-off is not that strong either.
They have to work much much harder to earn people's attention for 1.5 mins in 2014 - just watch the pace, amount of ideas, twist and turns creatives put in (almost) any other ads here.

lerbedeknorst's picture
8 pencils

I think this should not be viewed as an ad, although its on adsoftheworld. If this video was 30 seconds long there would be nothing left of the original story or the sappy song. It needed this length. I think the end zoom-out is the best part in the video. Showing you the complete emptiness, tranquil yet oppressive.

You have point saying people's attention span gets shorter everyday though. I bet most of you will not make it until my last sentence. But maybe that's because I'm boring.

TheSmirkingFox's picture
145 pencils

The only way this would have worked is if there had been no animals at all. Everyone who's seen the movie knows there are animals - you didn't need to have them appear then fade out.

The way this has been made, it comes across as subtle as a sledgehammer and preachy instead of being striking and memorable.

Log in or register to post comments