Commercially Green

The US Army’s $200m advertising campaign reminds me of those $16,000 toilet seats we are always hearing about. Furthermore, does John Madden do the writing for McCann?

Webster defines strong as having great physical power.
As having moral or intellectual power.
As striking or superior of its kind.

Sounds about right. At this point we are 13 seconds in or about $17M spent. For this McCann has given us a definition out of a dictionary.

But with all due respect to Webster,
There’s strong
And then there’s Army Strong.

Ooooh. Very profound. Then again you are doing military recruiting. So perhaps the people you would have as a target audience might not be as discerning as me. For those keeping tabs we are now 21 seconds in and have spent $27.5M.

(at this point there is a short video montage)
It is a strength like none other.
It is a physical strength.

You’ll notice that I have highlighted physical strength. I have done this because that is one of the definitions designated by Websters. I thought what we were discussing here was a type of “strong” that is unlike other “strongs”. So far we have paid you for 38 seconds or $49.7M. But hey, you might bring your A-game within the next 2 minutes. Let’s see what you have for me.

(more montage with the following text included)
It is an emotional strength.
It is a strength of character.
And strength of purpose.
The strength to do good today.
And the strength to do well tomorrow.

Again they fail at originality. First they are using the word “strength” in every single definition for the word “strong” that they have. I believe there is an unspoken rule that as far as definitions go it is mildly difficult to have a word that can only be defined by itself. Second they have “strength of character” listed, but if you refer back Webster’s definition includes “moral or intellectual power”. I must say they are lucky I’m not calling them on “emotional strength” as well (intellectual anyone?). 1:21 has now ticked off or 105.9 million tax payer dollars.

(cue montage of a man in a suit in his office and a man on a bridge fishing with his gun)
The strength to obey.
And strength to command.
The strength to build.
And the strength to tear down.
The strength to get yourself over

Oh please let them make the next one “and the strength to get over yourself”. You know, for all those jocks turned Captain American types.

And the strength to get over yourself

Alright! So now not only are you completely predictable and just saying one thing and then it’s opposite in some sort of lame attempt to show “completeness of strong”, but you are resorting to just rearranging words. 1:57 and sitting pretty at $152.9M. I feel some real profanity (that is the proper tense for this use of the word profound isn’t it?) coming on.

(the boring sepia tone montage continues I’ve seen this campaign before, I think it was called be all that you can be)
There is nothing on this green Earth,
That is strong than the US Army.
Because there is nothing on this green Earth,
That is stronger than a US Army Soldier.
Strong. Army Strong.

Fucking waste of money. See, I told you real profanity was coming. This is complete and utter garbage. The US Army has signed a 5-year contract with McCann advertising that is estimated to be worth $1 billion to the firm. And for what? For this? For a commercial that contradicts itself, gives dictionary definitions, and then finally in one giant rush of creative emptiness you say that there’s nothing stronger than the Army because there is nothing stronger than an Army soldier? I was already offended by the use of strength in the definitions of all the different ways the Army is strong, but to use a statement to validate itself is just doing an injustice to sentient beings around the world. Congratulations on your fabulous advertising campaign. The worst thing about this commercial is that it might be the first one to truly insult the concept of “commercially green” based on cost and it’s sponsored by our government.

It’s absolutely hilarious that you have spent so much money on this. What was wrong with Army of One? It was at least a little bit metaphorical and could even be reflected upon a little bit. Then again it is three total words. For your prospects, two might be better.