10 ms·

BMW Burns Logo onto Cinema-Goers’ Eyes

209 points by aresant 16y ago

burgerbrain 16y ago
These people seem to be fans of the novelty of the idea, not of BMW. Burning after-images into peoples retinas isn't some back door to their loyalty, anymore than flashing single frames of "DRINK COKE" make people thirst for cola.
- catshirt 16y ago
  I agree. However, I would also rank "optical illusion" pretty high in the list of deciding factors I process after I watch a commercial. What else? What they say? The actors or their logo? Or, their logo burned onto my eyes.
- limmeau 16y ago
  But still, BMW gets associated with technological innovation (if only in the field of cinema advertisement).
  - Ixiaus 16y ago
    It might be innovative in the sense of cinema advertisement (as you stated) but much of this isn't anything new. Most subliminal messaging only works if the recipient is willing to accept the idea that the advertisers want to plant; social engineering and NLP are topics many hackers on HN would find interesting. Analytical psychology is interesting too but far fewer would be into the more esoteric side of Jung's thought. Plenty of experiments have been done on strobe flashing images and sets of images on a subject's eyes. The end result is, generally, that the psyche becomes upset and the person irritated - it's kind of like having a religious zealot push their ideas onto you; if you're set in other beliefs, the experience is only irritating (if not enraging). This is where NLP, hypnosis (the real thing, not the wave a flame in your face and make you stop smoking thing), and manipulation of a person's feelings by eliciting their key feeling words comes into play. Best example and it's a dead obvious one, would be having a scene with Kim Kardashian in a slightly revealing getup talking to the audience of a movie theater and walking about while sipping on a big coke bottle. People that may not like coke may find Kim sexually arousing which generates social proof for the product in her hand and may loosen (but not fully convert) that consumer's dislike of the product. Case in point: I generally don't like Coca-Cola and it always make me feel crappy after drinking it (bloated, too much sugar, etc...) but I love to drink it at the theater. It just "tastes" good when I drink it at the theater because over time, through a combination of real life psychological links and the clever advertising Coke does in the theaters for its product I've grown to actually enjoy it when I'm at the theater. Now, that doesn't mean I actually purchase one when at the theater (I don't drink soda) but I am aware of the bridge created in my psyche. [EDIT] I realize the OP's comment was actually on technological innovation and had nothing to do with what I ended up talking about. Hope my comment is at least still interesting :)
- cyggie 16y ago
  I blieve the idea behind this is not to push a subliminal message into the view's mind but to create a "stunt" that'll get people talking about their brand (and in a positive way). Result I see so far from this commercial 1.) Wire has an article talking about BMW (and we're reading it) 2.) This is on HN already and will probably be on reddit/FB and other social site by tomorrow 3.) People will be talking about how innovative BMW's marketing is and associate that with their product 4.) Got me to sit here and watch the commercial with my full attention (last time I did that was checking out superbowl commercial the day after on youtube, and those cost them millions for the airtime) and want to experience the "real thing" afterward Achieving any single one of these will make it a good marketing campaign, getting all 4 make this a GREAT marketing campaign.
  - ntoshev 16y ago
    In fact, BMW can't show the commercial in regular cinemas because they don't have the equipment to produce the flash. They can't reach mass audience in this way. So the end product is in fact this viral video.
- zalew 16y ago
  actually, the 'drink coke' is an urban legend http://www.snopes.com/business/hidden/popcorn.asp http://www.snopes.com/business/hidden/popcorn.asp which obviously doesn't mean that there's no such thing as subliminal stimuli, just this example technique is not true. here's a better one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyQjr1YL0zg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyQjr1YL0zg and most of his tricks include sending signals to one's lower thresold level, no flashing anything between frames.
  - sp332 16y ago
    McDonalds did this in 2007. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xPvYgTvr8I http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xPvYgTvr8I
  - burgerbrain 16y ago
    That 'drink coke' is an urban legend is my point. There are instances in the real world where this has been attempted (The Republican tv ad campaign a few years ago that flashed the word "RATS" when talking about the Democrats for instance), but there is little to no actual credible evidence to show this works. It's all little more than marketers wetdreams.
maverhick 16y ago
Very interesting. Wonder if these techniques could be used in some form during presentations. Would be nice to have people have a sublime experience, even if it was for the briefest bit.
- c1sc0 16y ago
  I'm not sure you can replicate this online, it seems to rely on a flash far brighter than any display tech can deliver right now.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - eru 16y ago
    You could probably do something similar, if you stared into darkness long enough. Than your eyes get adjusted, and a not-so-bright light might suffice.
- isani 16y ago
  If you want to test the effect, just take any black-and-white logo and stare at one spot in it for 15-30 seconds. Then look at a neutral background.
profquail 16y ago
So, presumably "bright enough to burn the image on your retina" is lower than the threshold for permanent eye damage? If it's not a lot lower, it's scary to think that the movie-goers had no idea it was going to happen and a miscalibration of the mechanism could've caused lifelong eye problems.
- greendestiny 16y ago
  My understanding is that visible light is very safe because it takes a long time for damage to happen and you naturally protect yourself. Of course "burning an image" really just means causing your eye to perceive an after image.
  - jerf 16y ago
    Natural visible light, yes; even somewhat concentrated reflected sunlight will take more than a blink to harm you. Visible light in general, hell no it's not safe. For goodness' sake, be careful with your lasers. And beat the everloving crap out of anyone being casual with those damned bright green lasers, which are most emphatically not toys. I'm not saying that this theater flashing stunt was dangerous, I doubt it was anywhere near dangerous, I'm saying the idea that all visible light is safe can get you blind.
    - greendestiny 16y ago
      Right yeah, absolutely. What I really meant was white light of a fairly broad spectrum, hopefully no one read my comment and thought it applied to visible spectrum laser light.
- sliverstorm 16y ago
  I would guess the comparison to the sun is what's really driving your concern. IIRC, the real danger of the sun is the invisible parts of the spectrum- the danger of what direct exposure to the sun's UV rays can do to your retina. (Obviously a light bulb flash does not irradiate you with nearly as much UV as the sun)
- 16y ago
yread 16y ago
I hope this "innovation" get squashed by regulation.
- tomjen3 16y ago
  Agreed, this is not what you sign up for when you go to the movies. They should focus on improving the experience of their customers, instead of finding new ways to screw them over. Oh and reduce the cost of popcorn - seriously it is a joke.
  - eru 16y ago
    No, the popcorn is just a subsidy for the film. It allows cheapskates like me to have a cheaper entrance fee without popcorn.
    - joezydeco 16y ago
      The studios take more than 75% of the ticket price for themselves. The popcorn is keeping the theatre owner afloat.
      - eru 16y ago
        Yes. And without the popcorn, that money to keep the theatre owner afloat would have to come from somewhere else, e.g. the ticket price.
        fr0sty 16y ago
        yes, but... $10 ticket + $10 concessions = $10 net revenue (%25 of the ticket and %75 on concessions) $20 ticket + no concessions = $5 net revenue. It is the same reason CEO's take $1 salaries and stock grants/options. Salaries are taxed at %36-9 but long-term capital gains tax is only %15.
        eru 16y ago
        Yes. Though we wouldn't know whether the percentage rates would stay the same, if concessions weren't allowed. The current rates were negotiated with concessions in mind.
sliverstorm 16y ago
Now that's what I call bio-hacking.
clinton 16y ago
I suspect that this would be classed as subliminal advertising here In Australia, which is banned by the television code of practice: "1.8.4 use or involve any technique which attempts to convey information to the viewer by transmitting messages below or near the threshold of normal awareness." An interesting subliminal advertising case cropped up a few years back: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2082405.htm http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2082405.htm
- SimonPStevens 16y ago
  If it was just done without a mention you are probably right, but in this case the voice from the advert instructs the users to close their eyes so draws their attention to the image so it's not subliminal. I could be wrong though. It's probably a bit of a grey area.
  - huhtenberg 16y ago
    What if someone secretly stuffs an object up one's butt and then instructs the person to pull it out at the end of the commercial? Probably a bit of a gray area too by the same reasoning. (edit) For those not getting the joke - it meant to illustrate that the subsequent disclosure of something done without prior consent does not make it any more acceptable. Be it an image planted in one's head or something physical.
    - richbradshaw 16y ago
      I hate that sort of advert.
    - bad_user 16y ago
      Wow, I can picture a commercial for a Dove "beauty bar" and then at the end a white pigeon comes out your butt. That would be so awesome.
jonhendry 16y ago
I bet you could do something similar with a high-intensity digital projector behind the screen. Which could be interesting for, say, horror movies. Put together a frame with a high-contrast image, white on a black background. Maybe a mouthful of fangs, or Freddie Kruger's knives. Time it right, just before a moment where the skittish audience members will close or cover their eyes, and they'll instead see something nasty inside their eyelids.
- PostOnce 16y ago
  Someone would sue you, and as a result you would get the best press ever. Sued for being too scary, heh.
sonnymai 16y ago
Maybe this is a good reason to buy one of those anti-glare LCD glasses in the other HN thread. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2010367 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2010367
- burgerbrain 16y ago
  Wouldn't work. By the time the signals were processed by the digital camera, the photons would have long since slammed into your retina. You would have to literally beat the speed of light, because even just an instance of the light getting through would accomplish the task. Even placing the sensor several feet in front of your face wouldn't help, the fasted that you'd be able to send your signal from the sensor to the glasses is exactly as long as it'd take the flash to reach you, but you'll still have the lag of the electronics.
lamby 16y ago
> "During the ad, and its usual guff about living your dreams by wasting fossil fuels, [..]" What a bunch of hypocrites.
- middus 16y ago
  Why's that? Can you elaborate?
  - cullenking 16y ago
    Most likely they are going to eat a pizza delivered to their doorstep within the next week. Most likely they have cars in their driveway. Maybe they even have one of them new fangled hybrids that get the same mileage as compact cars from the 70's got without batteries.
qntm 16y ago
That's not the BMW logo. That's just "BMW".
ctrager 16y ago
Pardon me for being a provincial Midwesterner, but is it common that an playing for a German audience would be in English? Especially one that relies on the viewers following verbal instructions?
- middus 16y ago
  I'd say that a mix of German and English (often referred to as "Denglisch") is used in German ads.
- ry0ohki 16y ago
  It's pretty common to hear english on TV in Germany and Scandinavia, probably part of the reason they end up being more fluent in English then say France, where you very rarely hear English.
  - eru 16y ago
    It's more common in Scandinavia, though. In Germany we use dubbing instead of subtitles.
- wolfgke 16y ago
  In Germany most movies are dubbed - nearly all American ones are. Mostly niche movies are subtitled instead. In advertising it's different. Many advertisers think that the viewers understand English (most educated Germans do) quite OK - so it sometimes happens (more in cinema than in TV) that advertising films are shown in English for the brand to appear more cosmopolitan. Especially the slogans are often left untranslated. Since some Germans (especially from lower educated classes) aren't as fluent in English as the advertiser assumed, this leads to rather funny missunderstandings, for example: "Sat 1 - powered by Emotion" was understood as "Sat 1 - Kraft durch Freude" (translated back to English: "Sat 1 - Strength Through Joy") or "Esso - we are drivers, too" -> "Esso - wir sind zwei Fahrer" (here, "too" and "two" was confused) -> "Esso - we are two drivers" or "Douglas - come in and find out" -> "Douglas - komm rein, du wirst auch wieder herausfinden" -> "Douglas - come in, you will be able to find the way out of the shop then"
doron 16y ago
Isn't this a one trick pony, how many ads are you suppose to close your eyes for in the end?
kingkawn 16y ago
Max Headroom?
celias 16y ago
For some reason it reminds me of this dialog from an episode of Futurama Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century? Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.
olalonde 16y ago
Do people really close their eyes because they were told so in an advertisement?
- brk 16y ago
  Based on TFA and the supporting video, yes.
  - olalonde 16y ago
    Do people really believe everything they are told in an advertisement? (the video itself is clearly an advertisement for the advertising technique)
- brc 16y ago
  I'm not buying it. I suspect in the darkened cinema, though, you could probably get an idea of the image, and might close your eyes to see it better. Not because the dude on the ad told you to, though.
Groxx 16y ago
I realize they're going for the dramatic finish and all, but they could've just turned out the lights... then people would've seen "BMW" everywhere they looked. Like BMW was following them, surrounding them, and omg they're gonna EAT ME. OK, maybe not such a great idea. Could be good for circus clowns, though.
- ekanes 16y ago
  True, but the effect popped more because your eyes were physically closed and your brain knew it.

209 points by aresant 16y ago

These people seem to be fans of the novelty of the idea, not of BMW. Burning after-images into peoples retinas isn't some back door to their loyalty, anymore than flashing single frames of "DRINK COKE" make people thirst for cola.

catshirt 16y ago
I agree. However, I would also rank "optical illusion" pretty high in the list of deciding factors I process after I watch a commercial. What else? What they say? The actors or their logo? Or, their logo burned onto my eyes.
limmeau 16y ago
But still, BMW gets associated with technological innovation (if only in the field of cinema advertisement).
- Ixiaus 16y ago
  It might be innovative in the sense of cinema advertisement (as you stated) but much of this isn't anything new. Most subliminal messaging only works if the recipient is willing to accept the idea that the advertisers want to plant; social engineering and NLP are topics many hackers on HN would find interesting. Analytical psychology is interesting too but far fewer would be into the more esoteric side of Jung's thought. Plenty of experiments have been done on strobe flashing images and sets of images on a subject's eyes. The end result is, generally, that the psyche becomes upset and the person irritated - it's kind of like having a religious zealot push their ideas onto you; if you're set in other beliefs, the experience is only irritating (if not enraging). This is where NLP, hypnosis (the real thing, not the wave a flame in your face and make you stop smoking thing), and manipulation of a person's feelings by eliciting their key feeling words comes into play. Best example and it's a dead obvious one, would be having a scene with Kim Kardashian in a slightly revealing getup talking to the audience of a movie theater and walking about while sipping on a big coke bottle. People that may not like coke may find Kim sexually arousing which generates social proof for the product in her hand and may loosen (but not fully convert) that consumer's dislike of the product. Case in point: I generally don't like Coca-Cola and it always make me feel crappy after drinking it (bloated, too much sugar, etc...) but I love to drink it at the theater. It just "tastes" good when I drink it at the theater because over time, through a combination of real life psychological links and the clever advertising Coke does in the theaters for its product I've grown to actually enjoy it when I'm at the theater. Now, that doesn't mean I actually purchase one when at the theater (I don't drink soda) but I am aware of the bridge created in my psyche. [EDIT] I realize the OP's comment was actually on technological innovation and had nothing to do with what I ended up talking about. Hope my comment is at least still interesting :)
cyggie 16y ago
I blieve the idea behind this is not to push a subliminal message into the view's mind but to create a "stunt" that'll get people talking about their brand (and in a positive way). Result I see so far from this commercial 1.) Wire has an article talking about BMW (and we're reading it) 2.) This is on HN already and will probably be on reddit/FB and other social site by tomorrow 3.) People will be talking about how innovative BMW's marketing is and associate that with their product 4.) Got me to sit here and watch the commercial with my full attention (last time I did that was checking out superbowl commercial the day after on youtube, and those cost them millions for the airtime) and want to experience the "real thing" afterward Achieving any single one of these will make it a good marketing campaign, getting all 4 make this a GREAT marketing campaign.
- ntoshev 16y ago
  In fact, BMW can't show the commercial in regular cinemas because they don't have the equipment to produce the flash. They can't reach mass audience in this way. So the end product is in fact this viral video.
zalew 16y ago
actually, the 'drink coke' is an urban legend http://www.snopes.com/business/hidden/popcorn.asp http://www.snopes.com/business/hidden/popcorn.asp which obviously doesn't mean that there's no such thing as subliminal stimuli, just this example technique is not true. here's a better one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyQjr1YL0zg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyQjr1YL0zg and most of his tricks include sending signals to one's lower thresold level, no flashing anything between frames.
- sp332 16y ago
  McDonalds did this in 2007. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xPvYgTvr8I http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xPvYgTvr8I
- burgerbrain 16y ago
  That 'drink coke' is an urban legend is my point. There are instances in the real world where this has been attempted (The Republican tv ad campaign a few years ago that flashed the word "RATS" when talking about the Democrats for instance), but there is little to no actual credible evidence to show this works. It's all little more than marketers wetdreams.

maverhick 16y ago

Very interesting. Wonder if these techniques could be used in some form during presentations. Would be nice to have people have a sublime experience, even if it was for the briefest bit.

c1sc0 16y ago
I'm not sure you can replicate this online, it seems to rely on a flash far brighter than any display tech can deliver right now.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- eru 16y ago
  You could probably do something similar, if you stared into darkness long enough. Than your eyes get adjusted, and a not-so-bright light might suffice.
isani 16y ago
If you want to test the effect, just take any black-and-white logo and stare at one spot in it for 15-30 seconds. Then look at a neutral background.

profquail 16y ago

So, presumably "bright enough to burn the image on your retina" is lower than the threshold for permanent eye damage? If it's not a lot lower, it's scary to think that the movie-goers had no idea it was going to happen and a miscalibration of the mechanism could've caused lifelong eye problems.

greendestiny 16y ago
My understanding is that visible light is very safe because it takes a long time for damage to happen and you naturally protect yourself. Of course "burning an image" really just means causing your eye to perceive an after image.
- jerf 16y ago
  Natural visible light, yes; even somewhat concentrated reflected sunlight will take more than a blink to harm you. Visible light in general, hell no it's not safe. For goodness' sake, be careful with your lasers. And beat the everloving crap out of anyone being casual with those damned bright green lasers, which are most emphatically not toys. I'm not saying that this theater flashing stunt was dangerous, I doubt it was anywhere near dangerous, I'm saying the idea that all visible light is safe can get you blind.
  - greendestiny 16y ago
    Right yeah, absolutely. What I really meant was white light of a fairly broad spectrum, hopefully no one read my comment and thought it applied to visible spectrum laser light.
sliverstorm 16y ago
I would guess the comparison to the sun is what's really driving your concern. IIRC, the real danger of the sun is the invisible parts of the spectrum- the danger of what direct exposure to the sun's UV rays can do to your retina. (Obviously a light bulb flash does not irradiate you with nearly as much UV as the sun)
16y ago

yread 16y ago

I hope this "innovation" get squashed by regulation.

tomjen3 16y ago
Agreed, this is not what you sign up for when you go to the movies. They should focus on improving the experience of their customers, instead of finding new ways to screw them over. Oh and reduce the cost of popcorn - seriously it is a joke.
- eru 16y ago
  No, the popcorn is just a subsidy for the film. It allows cheapskates like me to have a cheaper entrance fee without popcorn.
  - joezydeco 16y ago
    The studios take more than 75% of the ticket price for themselves. The popcorn is keeping the theatre owner afloat.
    - eru 16y ago
      Yes. And without the popcorn, that money to keep the theatre owner afloat would have to come from somewhere else, e.g. the ticket price.
      - fr0sty 16y ago
        yes, but... $10 ticket + $10 concessions = $10 net revenue (%25 of the ticket and %75 on concessions) $20 ticket + no concessions = $5 net revenue. It is the same reason CEO's take $1 salaries and stock grants/options. Salaries are taxed at %36-9 but long-term capital gains tax is only %15.
        eru 16y ago
        Yes. Though we wouldn't know whether the percentage rates would stay the same, if concessions weren't allowed. The current rates were negotiated with concessions in mind.

sliverstorm 16y ago

Now that's what I call bio-hacking.

clinton 16y ago

I suspect that this would be classed as subliminal advertising here In Australia, which is banned by the television code of practice: "1.8.4 use or involve any technique which attempts to convey information to the viewer by transmitting messages below or near the threshold of normal awareness." An interesting subliminal advertising case cropped up a few years back: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2082405.htm http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2082405.htm

SimonPStevens 16y ago
If it was just done without a mention you are probably right, but in this case the voice from the advert instructs the users to close their eyes so draws their attention to the image so it's not subliminal. I could be wrong though. It's probably a bit of a grey area.
- huhtenberg 16y ago
  What if someone secretly stuffs an object up one's butt and then instructs the person to pull it out at the end of the commercial? Probably a bit of a gray area too by the same reasoning. (edit) For those not getting the joke - it meant to illustrate that the subsequent disclosure of something done without prior consent does not make it any more acceptable. Be it an image planted in one's head or something physical.
  - richbradshaw 16y ago
    I hate that sort of advert.
  - bad_user 16y ago
    Wow, I can picture a commercial for a Dove "beauty bar" and then at the end a white pigeon comes out your butt. That would be so awesome.

jonhendry 16y ago

I bet you could do something similar with a high-intensity digital projector behind the screen. Which could be interesting for, say, horror movies. Put together a frame with a high-contrast image, white on a black background. Maybe a mouthful of fangs, or Freddie Kruger's knives. Time it right, just before a moment where the skittish audience members will close or cover their eyes, and they'll instead see something nasty inside their eyelids.

PostOnce 16y ago
Someone would sue you, and as a result you would get the best press ever. Sued for being too scary, heh.

sonnymai 16y ago

Maybe this is a good reason to buy one of those anti-glare LCD glasses in the other HN thread. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2010367 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2010367

burgerbrain 16y ago
Wouldn't work. By the time the signals were processed by the digital camera, the photons would have long since slammed into your retina. You would have to literally beat the speed of light, because even just an instance of the light getting through would accomplish the task. Even placing the sensor several feet in front of your face wouldn't help, the fasted that you'd be able to send your signal from the sensor to the glasses is exactly as long as it'd take the flash to reach you, but you'll still have the lag of the electronics.

lamby 16y ago

> "During the ad, and its usual guff about living your dreams by wasting fossil fuels, [..]" What a bunch of hypocrites.

middus 16y ago
Why's that? Can you elaborate?
- cullenking 16y ago
  Most likely they are going to eat a pizza delivered to their doorstep within the next week. Most likely they have cars in their driveway. Maybe they even have one of them new fangled hybrids that get the same mileage as compact cars from the 70's got without batteries.

qntm 16y ago

That's not the BMW logo. That's just "BMW".

ctrager 16y ago

Pardon me for being a provincial Midwesterner, but is it common that an playing for a German audience would be in English? Especially one that relies on the viewers following verbal instructions?

middus 16y ago
I'd say that a mix of German and English (often referred to as "Denglisch") is used in German ads.
ry0ohki 16y ago
It's pretty common to hear english on TV in Germany and Scandinavia, probably part of the reason they end up being more fluent in English then say France, where you very rarely hear English.
- eru 16y ago
  It's more common in Scandinavia, though. In Germany we use dubbing instead of subtitles.
wolfgke 16y ago
In Germany most movies are dubbed - nearly all American ones are. Mostly niche movies are subtitled instead. In advertising it's different. Many advertisers think that the viewers understand English (most educated Germans do) quite OK - so it sometimes happens (more in cinema than in TV) that advertising films are shown in English for the brand to appear more cosmopolitan. Especially the slogans are often left untranslated. Since some Germans (especially from lower educated classes) aren't as fluent in English as the advertiser assumed, this leads to rather funny missunderstandings, for example: "Sat 1 - powered by Emotion" was understood as "Sat 1 - Kraft durch Freude" (translated back to English: "Sat 1 - Strength Through Joy") or "Esso - we are drivers, too" -> "Esso - wir sind zwei Fahrer" (here, "too" and "two" was confused) -> "Esso - we are two drivers" or "Douglas - come in and find out" -> "Douglas - komm rein, du wirst auch wieder herausfinden" -> "Douglas - come in, you will be able to find the way out of the shop then"

doron 16y ago

Isn't this a one trick pony, how many ads are you suppose to close your eyes for in the end?

kingkawn 16y ago

Max Headroom?

celias 16y ago

For some reason it reminds me of this dialog from an episode of Futurama Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 21st century? Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in dreams, no siree.

olalonde 16y ago

Do people really close their eyes because they were told so in an advertisement?

brk 16y ago
Based on TFA and the supporting video, yes.
- olalonde 16y ago
  Do people really believe everything they are told in an advertisement? (the video itself is clearly an advertisement for the advertising technique)
brc 16y ago
I'm not buying it. I suspect in the darkened cinema, though, you could probably get an idea of the image, and might close your eyes to see it better. Not because the dude on the ad told you to, though.

Groxx 16y ago

I realize they're going for the dramatic finish and all, but they could've just turned out the lights... then people would've seen "BMW" everywhere they looked. Like BMW was following them, surrounding them, and omg they're gonna EAT ME. OK, maybe not such a great idea. Could be good for circus clowns, though.

ekanes 16y ago
True, but the effect popped more because your eyes were physically closed and your brain knew it.