7 ms·
When I watch the trailer, it feels very cringe. I can absolutely see what they're going for- something like "you're iPad contains the power of all these cultur
by benrutter 2y ago
When I watch the trailer, it feels very cringe.
I can absolutely see what they're going for- something like "you're iPad contains the power of all these cultural tools", but visually that connection isn't there. It just looks like "Hooray! Culture has been destroyed, now there is only iPad!"
- passion__desire 2y agoI took the message that all that culture is now available in an even slimmer form factor. This is the problem with art. Unambiguous messaging is impossible as one casts a wider net of interpretation
- benrutter 2y agoVery true- I wonder if the prevailing interpretation would be different if this was 20 years ago. The destruction of all those tools would probably have a much more "punk rock" interpretation from people if Apple weren't the megacorp they are today.
- bitlevel 2y agoI found it super ironic how they blathered on about all of the recycling going on in their products, then blatently show all those items being destroyed when they could clearly be recycled. I do think that the 'rendered' idea was the best - almost thinking differently, or something...:S
- gizmo 2y agoIt's an animation of items being destroyed. It's very fake and Apple used an exaggerated cartoon style animation so it couldn't get mistaken for reality. It's like getting mad at road runner for dropping a piano on Wile E Coyote.
- hu3 2y agoI think real instruments were destroyed. Am I wrong?
- tpmoney 2y agoI wouldn't think most (if any of it) was real. At the most I'd expect they were destructive props in the same way the table with the legs sawn to break in the just the right way for a movie stunt is a "real" table, but not a "real table".
- hu3 2y agoInterestingly, Nitendo did it before: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzAo9HzOgtQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzAo9HzOgtQ
- passion__desire 2y agoDid LG get the same kinda hate on this ad in 2008? https://twitter.com/durreadan01/status/1788519222340927791 https://twitter.com/durreadan01/status/1788519222340927791
- gizmo 2y agoYes, you're wrong. The giant hydraulic press from the ad doesn't exist.
- hu3 2y agoThe giant press might be CGI. But some closeups look real. Like the paint cans exploding over the piano: https://youtu.be/ntjkwIXWtrc?si=N6QWwagucRyKp40P&t=20 https://youtu.be/ntjkwIXWtrc?si=N6QWwagucRyKp40P&t=20
- gizmo 2y agoI'm sorry but that looks 100% fake. Liquids are not compressible. The hollow piano would give in first.
- marcosdumay 2y agoThere's nothing anti-establishment on the commercial. They need some minimal amount of punk if they want a "punk rock" aesthetic. All that is there is a megacorp stealing a previously popular (comical) format, to show people's culture being (quite forcefully) transformed into establishment. The commercial is repulsively anti-punk.
- drak0n1c 2y ago20 years ago there were healthier vestiges of traditional arts and culture across society - it's easy not to appreciate or miss things until they're gone.
- flohofwoe 2y ago> This is the problem with art. Sorry, but this polished piece of corporate messaging is anything but art. It's at best shiny kitsch.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ZoomZoomZoom 2y ago1. It's not a problem, it's the point. 2. It looks like you're implying the ad is somehow a piece of art. It's not, it's an ad.
- least 2y agoWhy does something being an ad prevent it from being art?
- ZoomZoomZoom 2y agoAdvertisement serves a specific purpose: promoting a product/service. A piece of art can't have any such motivations behind it by definition.
- least 2y agoBy whose definition? Art is creative expression and there's no qualifiers in standard definitions to exclude work that is used to promote something else. I'd say flyers for shows are art. or movie posters. or book covers, for that matter. Or trailer music? corporate jingles? They're all art.
- ZoomZoomZoom 2y agoBy academic definition in the Science of Culture school of thought that I align with. Art is roughly self-expression or interpretation of reality performed with symbolic means. It's a debatable definition of course, as aesthetics are nebulous, but most others are far too broad and therefore lose their meaning and usability, at least in the academic context. > I'd say flyers for shows are art. or movie posters. or book covers, for that matter. Or trailer music? corporate jingles? They're all art. They are not if we're talking in generals, though there can be conditions where a specific piece can be viewed as such, of course. All the things you mentioned are products of craft most of the time. Crafts belong to the wider sphere of aesthetic culture of course, but it's not art. Of course, I know some artist/illustrators closely collaborating with authors/musicians for their posters and covers, but it's more of an exception to the rule. Roughly speaking, the need to tailor a creation to align with the desired brand image or marketing strategy inevitably conflicts with honest self-expression.
- bingbingbing777 2y agoIt's not art, it's an advertisement.
- latexr 2y agoI’m not saying this ad was art, but art and advertisement aren’t mutually exclusive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell's_Soup_Cans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell's_Soup_Cans
- bingbingbing777 2y agoThat's not an advertisement. Irrelevant.
- antonyt 2y agoI hate ads, but I'm struggling to understand how something being an ad disqualifies it from being art. Advertising is a creative human endeavor. Ads are designed to make you feel something, just like art.
- ZoomZoomZoom 2y ago> Ads are designed to make you feel something, just like art. Tear gas is designed to make you feel something.
- throwaway743 2y agoAt their core, their for commercial/promotional purposes. Ads are inherently meant to drive consumerism, where as art is not.
- skywhopper 2y agoSome ads clearly are art. Speaking of Apple, their 1984 ad was very much a work of art. Things can have more than one meaning and purpose.
- deleted 2y ago
- hnaccount_rng 2y agoI think everybody agrees that that was the _intended_ message. But it's a forced transition. At the end of the ad there is _just_ an iPad. It's not as if the user has any choice now. And that makes the ad very weak. Why is Apple even going into the destruction business? They are supposed to be a creative (creating?) company, if it were an Lockheed Martin ad it would have fit ;)
- mattnewton 2y agoI think the mark of a good ad is that you can turn the music off and most people will get the message. The imagery of destroying the things is the problem, if you turn the music off you really don’t know how you are supposed to feel about this. Apple conveyed similar messages before with animations that did not destroy the underlying album arts, just shrunk them into an iPod. It would hit very different if they crushed a bunch of music paraphernalia people got a lot of enjoyment out of.
- mulmen 2y agoWhat if they crushed a stack of unsold Songs of Innocence albums?
- password54321 2y agoThat was obviously the point. It was about compression not destruction.
- sangnoir 2y agoI'm not so sure about that; the emoji with the eyeballs squeezed out of their sockets didn't exactly scream "compression" to me. It felt like they were aiming for over the top cartoonish destruction - but destruction nonetheless.
- passion__desire 2y agoMaybe they took inspiration from hydraulic press and Will It Blend channels
- skywhopper 2y agoThe ad clearly didn't communicate that message to a huge portion of its audience. There's plenty of us who can see the intent but still don't like the ad. There are so many other ways to communicate that message in a more effective way.
- adverbly 2y agoAgreed. Its not Apple's style, but they could have opened the ad with some cringe fake scientists discussing how to shrink and/or combine and/or smush music, books, art, etc together. And then at the end show them excitedly rushing to the IPad as if they've solved everything.
- mulmen 2y agoSo an Aperture Labs reference? They could have Chell pick up the iPad and throw it at a screen of Cave Johnson’s motivational speech. Then it could bounce off without causing damage, showing how lightweight it is, and who it truly serves.
- password54321 2y agoI really hope you don't celebrate AI generators then because that is actually set out to destroy culture and tools.
- chefkd 2y agoWhere I'm from they said the phone was the devil it's a totally valid and human reaction to change. Change is almost always violent
- password54321 2y agoThis doesn't tell me anything and I literally have a masters in AI.
- whydid 2y agoIt has the vibe of something made by a team who have never created only for the pure love of art.
- tsunamifury 2y agoHahahaha you’ve never worked in ad creative have you? It’s full of people who have been crushed by their inability to support themselves making pure art. This ad makes perfect sense from that perspective.
- atmosx 2y agoOkay, Zappa is a bit defeatist although what he says is true, I don't think it's that bad... But here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88zvm7-fhKo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88zvm7-fhKo (Frank Zappa on American culture)
- jeremyjh 2y agoFrankly it’s bizarre. He was a fantastic rock musician who seemed to forget where delta blues, jazz, bluegrass comes from. They drew on older traditions but were distinctly American culture. Maybe his point was really that it’s not popular culture but you can criticize any country’s pop culture. edit: I'm surprised at the downvote. I'm a huge Zappa fan. I know that he was into many kinds of music. That is why I find it strange that he doesn't even consider the rich tradition of American folk music to be part of our culture. So which is it, am I wrong that he was a great musician? Am I wrong about the rich tradition of American folk music? Am I wrong about pop culture in other countries? Is it because I didn't mention country music?
- jacobgkau 2y agoI didn't downvote you (just upvoted, since you got me to stop and pay attention to that parent comment). I understand and agree with your point that certain genres of music have significantly evolved, if not been entirely created in, the US, and that it's weird for a professional musician to take the stance that that isn't the case. At the same time, I've often thought similar things to what Frank Zappa said (despite never hearing/reading that interview before, or knowing much about him at all). I often think about how a lot of the social/racial/religious/etc unrest we have going on in the US is because we have no national identity. We are a melting pot, but we're also just a melting pot. Similar to convincing people to stop perpetuating racial issues in the US, when race used to be connected with nationality (and still is in some places)-- or convincing people to stop raking modern-day Americans over the coals for people 250 years ago taking the land from Native Americans-- it's going to be difficult to convince people to draw a line at a point in time where we stopped "stealing" or "being influenced by" other countries' music and started legitimately creating our own. It will simply never have been "from scratch," and people will either figure out how to accept that and (critically) move on at some point, or they'll keep being upset about it for eternity and we'll keep tearing ourselves apart.
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y agoDouble-edge sword with only one surface. Just don't get it wet, expect it to last over 7 years, expect your old accessories to work with it, or for it to actually substitute for the mastery of physical artistic crafts like Mehmet Girgiç is to felt.
- underwater 2y agoBeautiful, colourful, creative objects gathered together in a the middle of a grey room and destroyed to be replaced by a generic rectangle. This is like the 1984 ad with Apple as the bad guys.
- neop1x 2y agoYes, they should somehow just compress them using CG without destroying them IMO.