The Horrific End of Banner Ads
August 20, 2009 8:05 AM   Subscribe

The horrific end of banner ads! In preparation for Rob Zombie's Halloween II, The digital design agency Heavenspot declares war on the insipid animated people who live inside our banner ads.
posted by hermitosis (48 comments total) 7 users marked this as a favorite
 
I imagine these would be annoying (flashing!) on a page, but as a list, here? Clever!
posted by The Whelk at 8:07 AM on August 20, 2009


Okay -- these are really pretty good. Thanks!
posted by Guy_Inamonkeysuit at 8:07 AM on August 20, 2009


I love how when there are two people in the "ad", one of them just suddenly backs away. The guy dancing with the girl just abandons her!
posted by hippybear at 8:08 AM on August 20, 2009


That's pretty funny. Also, I enjoy Rob Zombie's movies. Okay, really I just enjoy The Devil's Rejects, but I enjoy it so much that I still say "I enjoy Rob Zombie's movies."
posted by Bookhouse at 8:09 AM on August 20, 2009


Pepsi, uh, red?
posted by ardgedee at 8:11 AM on August 20, 2009


I've never understood those ads (or the recent incarnation, which usually feature the title "Obama sends Moms back to college" and feature videos of women working out). I LOVED these.

I know someone who's a reporter for a marketing industry trade paper and I've forwarded him the link in case he wants to do a print piece on these.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:12 AM on August 20, 2009


Okay, so its an animated ad, that is somehow supposed to be attacking animated ads. Wow, that is so hardcore.
posted by Antidisestablishmentarianist at 8:16 AM on August 20, 2009 [2 favorites]


Haha; the first ever case when adblock / no script has interfered with my web reading pleasure.
posted by artaxerxes at 8:19 AM on August 20, 2009 [2 favorites]


They don't understand the medium. If they did, they'd leave a gore-spattered mess after the victim was dispatched or dragged off scene, and let the reader click the banner to see what the hell that was. By tossing up the logo, there's no incentive for click-through.

You can either advertise for saturation - show the product (character, in this case) and logo everywhere you can - or you can advertise for viral - get people engaged and interested, and lead them to a site where you can control the message. These ads are neither fish nor fowl, so their impact isn't all that great. It would make a great series of TV ads done this way, but it fails on teh inter-tubes.
posted by Slap*Happy at 8:24 AM on August 20, 2009 [6 favorites]


I have a feeling these five-second ads contain as much Halloween 2 as anyone will need to see.
posted by The Card Cheat at 8:26 AM on August 20, 2009 [6 favorites]


The Mockbook one is stupid. There's too much for them to copy for it to be a surprise. The celebrities, the aesthetic attention to detail. "It's killer" is too much of a tell.

But the other ones are great, even the badly done loops are the same. Especially the tuxedo guy.
posted by Napierzaza at 8:27 AM on August 20, 2009


Well, of *course* they killed the PC guy.

/ NOT APPLE-IST
posted by you just lost the game at 8:27 AM on August 20, 2009 [2 favorites]


Can someone, anyone, please explain to me how The Devil's Rejects isn't just a ridiculous pile of shit? I'm begging you. Listen, I love crappy horror movies. I adore them. But this . . . this is the one where nobody can act for anything, and at one point everyone stops for ice cream? The climactic scene is set to Free Bird? I kneel before you all, you who like this rancid cucumber of a movie, and beg for understanding.
posted by Skot at 8:29 AM on August 20, 2009


I see your point, Slap. And it would be cool to see ads like the ones you described. But I think movie ads are more about creating a general awareness of release dates and generating anticipation. Click-through is awesome, but not really super-important on this front. If you get people to click through to the Halloween 2 website to figure out what the hell it is they just saw, then the majority of them will click away again the second they find out. (Those who linger are probably the same people who will click these ads and go explore the movie site.)

Also, if there was actual gore everywhere after the killings, I bet far fewer sites would actually carry the ads.
posted by hermitosis at 8:31 AM on August 20, 2009


this is the one where nobody can act for anything, and at one point everyone stops for ice cream? The climactic scene is set to Free Bird?

Funny, I've avoided Rejects because I couldn't stand House of 1000 Corpses, but I think you just sold me on it, Skot.
posted by hermitosis at 8:35 AM on August 20, 2009 [1 favorite]


This is more germane if you read the NYT profile of the Weinsteins. It is sort of sad to see them fall, as they truly love cinema, but the article notes how they're trying to turn around the House of Weinstein by becoming more hands on. In recent years, especially with marketing and promotion, they became distracted with other gentlemanly pursuits. Considering they're only focusing on launching a handful of movies this year, it is interesting to see the Weinstein machine come back to life with innovative marketing like this.
posted by geoff. at 8:38 AM on August 20, 2009


Probably shouldn't click on the hot date one first.
posted by redsparkler at 8:43 AM on August 20, 2009


I work with banner ads, and I'm always pleased to see creatives that are well-done and clever. These gave me a chuckle.

And believe me, there are days when I wish Michael Myers would show up and brutally drag off my ads.
posted by Metroid Baby at 8:44 AM on August 20, 2009


Wow. Those were pretty lame. Happily, like millions of others, thanks to Ad-Block, I'll probably never see them in the wild. Which, of course, is probably why they're trying to viral them like this.
posted by Thorzdad at 8:48 AM on August 20, 2009


They should have made just one where Michael starts dancing too.
posted by orme at 8:50 AM on August 20, 2009


Also, Michael should destroy the Heavenspot website.
posted by orme at 8:51 AM on August 20, 2009


Of course, I had to disable Adblock Plus before I could view the ads....

How was Rob Zombie's Halloween? I love the origianal John Capenter version, but completely missed the remake. Is it worth renting?
posted by paulg at 8:52 AM on August 20, 2009


Wish they'd get William Shatner to do one.
posted by Guy_Inamonkeysuit at 8:53 AM on August 20, 2009


Can someone, anyone, please explain to me how The Devil's Rejects isn't just a ridiculous pile of shit?

Well it's got an Evil Clown played by B-movie legend Sid Haig... but yeah, I think Mr Zombie makes a much better musician than a film director.
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 8:54 AM on August 20, 2009


Okay, so its an animated ad, that is somehow supposed to be attacking animated ads. Wow, that is so hardcore.

... eponysterical?
posted by joe lisboa at 8:54 AM on August 20, 2009


It's still distracting, blinky shit. For a movie that looks kinda crap.
posted by everichon at 9:01 AM on August 20, 2009


I need to elaborate: I wouldn't want to see a blinky, animated "deconstructive" ad even if it was for Tarkovsky's Stalker.

Yes I would.
posted by everichon at 9:03 AM on August 20, 2009 [1 favorite]


How was Rob Zombie's Halloween? I love the origianal John Capenter version, but completely missed the remake. Is it worth renting?

No. Like the rest of Zombie's movies, it's a piece of hack-work, suffering from clumsy over-direction, bad acting, and a really weak script. It's dull, stupid, and insulting.
posted by item at 9:03 AM on August 20, 2009 [2 favorites]


The climactic scene is set to Free Bird?

The fact that you list this as a negative, Skot, let's me know we'll never see eye to eye on the film. The soundtrack is one of the film's many highlights. Anyway, I think it's tremendously fun trash (although the sexualized violence is a sore spot with me).

How was Rob Zombie's Halloween? I love the origianal John Capenter version, but completely missed the remake. Is it worth renting?


No. It might be a little better than the average modern horror-movie remake, but it's working from such great source material that it better be fantastic, and it's not even close.
posted by Bookhouse at 9:04 AM on August 20, 2009


Can someone, anyone, please explain to me how The Devil's Rejects isn't just a ridiculous pile of shit?

For me it was mainly that he took the usual horror film tropes and took them in a new direction. House of 1000 Corpses was thoroughly average, and was almost a direct ripoff of Texas Chainsaw Massacre and other films that featured random kids wandering into the den of an insane group of homicidal hillbillies. Even though that film was more cliche than average, almost all horror films center around a clueless victim or group of victims who somehow stumble upon some sort monster that chases and kills them over the course of the film. The victims are supposed to be surrogates for the audience, so there is a strong tendency for horror films to put in elements to make the audience identify with the victims (in some cases going as far as to set scenes inside of movie theaters, or back in the day, drive-ins).

In The Devil's Rejects, the insane hillbillies are instead the focus, and Rob Zombie uses a lot the techniques to instead make the audience identify with the villains. Instead of being nameless mutants like most similar films, they actually have different personalities and interpersonal relationships. On the other hand the innocent country band that has the misfortune of staying in the same hotel is more of a side note to the film, and the sheriff that pursues them is clearly portrayed as being a villain in his own right. The end result is a story that is more similar to films like Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer than a standard slasher film, which I think is a good thing. It's not exactly Citizen Kane, but it's nice to see a film that isn't a cookie-cutter copy of every other entry in the genre.
posted by burnmp3s at 9:12 AM on August 20, 2009 [3 favorites]


I've never found anything Zombie did cinematically to be anything more than unwatchable garbage really. I also thought these ads were lame. Looping person gets grabbed by michael myers, wow brilliant.
posted by dead cousin ted at 9:15 AM on August 20, 2009


Just because you've declared the thing you're doing to be crap doesn't make it not crap. In other words, self-awareness of being crap doesn't undo the crap.

See also any episode of the Simpsons where Comic Book Guy calls it the "Worst Episode Ever".
posted by inturnaround at 9:18 AM on August 20, 2009


I think Mr Zombie makes a much better musician than a film director.

Even that's pushing it.
posted by Partario at 9:21 AM on August 20, 2009


Can someone, anyone, please explain to me how The Devil's Rejects isn't just a ridiculous pile of shit?

Disclaimer: I have not actually seen The Devil's Rejects. However -- sometimes the reason people like something is precisely because it is a ridiculous pile of shit. Hell, the guys behind Mystery Science Theater 3000 were counting on that paradox.

Still, the "so bad it's good" genre does have its own nuances as well. I actually thought Battlefield Earth wasn't bad enough to be enjoyable, whereas other bad movie fans I know think that the inherant badness of one of my own favorites is a turnoff. Maybe this just doesn't get you in the "gloriously-bad" funnybone the way something else does.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:23 AM on August 20, 2009 [1 favorite]


Rob Zombie may not get much love here, but the scene from House Of 1000 Corpses where the sheriff has the gun pointed at his head and the crane shot just keeps pulling back and pulling back and pulling back... it's nearly Hitchcockian in tension and really causes the viewer to be rooting for the trigger to be pulled. I really didn't like much of that movie, but that one scene was nearly worth the rest of it for me.
posted by hippybear at 9:31 AM on August 20, 2009 [2 favorites]


Thanks, burnmp3s, for at least some explication. I can't say that I buy it myself, but at least I can glean some understanding for the (to me) completely bizarre critical response that movie garnered.

Still, the "so bad it's good" genre does have its own nuances as well.

Hey, you don't have to tell me. You're talking to a guy who cannot wait to re-watch screaming disasters of insanity such as In the Name of the King, a story of a farmer named Farmer who teams up with a clearly embarrassed Ron Perlman to meet forest ninjas in the form of Natasha Henstridge; battles liplessly deranged magicians such as Ray Liotta; brieflly encounters King "Please sign my check" Burt Reynolds (featuring one of the most hilarious death scenes ever put to film); and certainly not least of all, Prince Matthew Lillard, who I'm pretty sure (at least I really hope so) was just dead drunk for the entire filming.
posted by Skot at 9:40 AM on August 20, 2009


Also anything else Uwe Boll ever had anything to do with.
posted by dead cousin ted at 9:45 AM on August 20, 2009


Rob Zombie makes me sad. He likes all the same things I do, and I want him to be successful, because he seems like someone who's really genuinely enthusiastic about making movies -- specifically about making horror movies. That's great. And I think he's good at the technical aspects of making movies; we aren't talking about Stanley Kubrick here, but he can frame a shot, he can make you anxious about what's behind that corner, and he can build an environment. But he has lousy taste in actors and is just, point blank, not a good writer. He obviously has a great affection for Garth Ennis -- why not give him a call? Or hell: HEY ROB ZOMBIE. WHY NOT GIVE ME A CALL, YOU KNOW WHAT I AM SAYING. I CAN WRITE THIS SHIT UP DUDE. E-MAIL IN PROFILE
posted by kittens for breakfast at 10:14 AM on August 20, 2009


getting back to the banner ads... nice concept, but the execution seems a bit lame. Especially when "evil killer" grabs victim. It looks like a lackluster run-through, not a keeper take. And there was little done in editing even to improve that.

The grab and transition should have been so fast and quirky that people keep refreshing the page to see the ad again.

(ok, hire me, already)
posted by Artful Codger at 10:29 AM on August 20, 2009


He totally cops a feel on the "Hot Date" woman.
posted by Dr-Baa at 10:44 AM on August 20, 2009


Rewatching it, he totally grabs some boobage there.
posted by dead cousin ted at 11:11 AM on August 20, 2009


It's interesting that there seems to be two camps of horror fans. Those who like House Of 1000 Corpses and not The Devil's Rejects and the camp for whom it's the other way around.

I'm in the former, I loved the strange places that House.. went, but found the long term torture-porn vibe of Devil's.. to be a real turn off. The climactic scene felt really tacked on and felt like a real left turn to me because up until then I hadn't found anything to identify with in their characters at all.

Plus, the fact that the 'happy place' for them was a hallmark card felt really out of character.

In any case, despite my distaste for the lack of thematic originality coming out of Hollywood, I quite like the Halloween reboot he helmed. He struck a really good balance between "Mike Myers is a kid who got really screwed up early and now is a killer" and "Mike Myers is an unexplainable force of destruction"

..and that all comes back around to: These were really funny. Thanks!
posted by lumpenprole at 11:54 AM on August 20, 2009


I'm a fan of neither. And I loathed his Halloween. But I keep rooting for Zombie to make a good one and I keep on being disappointed. He's definitely not a hack as Kitten points out. He's in it because he loves the genre. Unfortunately, he's not that good. The state of American horror films right now is really tragic.
posted by cazoo at 12:11 PM on August 20, 2009


I don't think he's a hack, completely. I think he would probably make a fantastic production designer in the service of a good script, and maybe even a good director if he had some good actors to work with. While I do like the Devil's Rejects, I agree that the fact that he's the closest thing out there to a mainstream horror auteur says more about the state of the genre than it says about him.
posted by Bookhouse at 1:07 PM on August 20, 2009


They don't understand the medium. If they did, they'd leave a gore-spattered mess after the victim was dispatched or dragged off scene, and let the reader click the banner to see what the hell that was. By tossing up the logo, there's no incentive for click-through.

So what? They don't need people to click through, they need people to go see the movie. If people look at the ad and remember it, they've done what they've needed to do. No one ever clicks through print or TV ads, and they seem to work.

Besides, what would they even have on their website that would make people more likely to see the movie that isn't in the ads already?

Wow. Those were pretty lame. Happily, like millions of others, thanks to Ad-Block, I'll probably never see them in the wild. Which, of course, is probably why they're trying to viral them like this.

Hardly anyone actually uses adblock.
posted by delmoi at 4:00 PM on August 20, 2009


I saw the Halloween remake last night for the first time. Among other things (the remarkable vulgarity and vacuity, the repugnant class warfare, the gratuitous sadism, etc), what got me was the fact that Rob Zombie simply doesn't get the character of Michael Myers. Doesn't get him at all. Fleshing out the boogeyman doesn't make him scarier, it limits him. Showing him (literally and figuratively) without the mask? You're not a fucking arthouse director, Zombie; you're making horror flicks. The mask makes him scary. He is unscary without the mask.

I won't elaborate except to say that the movie shows a woman being gang-raped, more or less for titillation. I was quite certain when that scene began that they would never have the poor taste to go through with it, but yeah, they did. It's a scene I will remember next time I consider going to one of his movies.
posted by Epenthesis at 6:06 PM on August 20, 2009 [1 favorite]


Just saw an Activia commercial with Jamie Lee Curtis. Still more entertaining than that damn movie.
posted by Epenthesis at 6:14 PM on August 20, 2009


I'm somewhat fascinated by the type of director for whom their entire appeal mostly comes from an appreciation of a certain aesthetic and the enjoyment of seeing that aesthetic blown up to a complete functioning little world. The standard elements that a movie normally rely on become completely secondary. It's purely fetishistic. Rob Zombie is pretty much the Wes Anderson of horror. He's not really making movies so much as building really elaborate dioramas. I can dig his work on that level.
posted by billyfleetwood at 12:20 AM on August 21, 2009


« Older A New Approach to Aid   |   BORN TO DIE! NEW YORK'S NEW YORK! THE TURN OF THE... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments