December 5, 2004
chanel soap grabbing
Well, this is quite funny:
Recently I panned the new Chanel No. 5 commercial:
It was corny, it was cliché, it was fake, it was bland, it was phoney, it was emotionally dead, it was utterly drenched in has-been pomposity. It was everything Chanel SHOULD NOT be.So the thread just received this comment from an anonymous poster:
To the endless pile of critics - please, stop criticising the piece of work because you don't understand it, or have some deep hatred towards the more fortunate world of luxury. Either admire it, or ignore it, do not make absurd comparisons between the world of luxury and the world that is exemplified by fragrance you buy from the drug store.Well, Anonymous, that explains why Chanel got into the soap business, so people like you can reach down and grab it. That's what they want, of course. They want you to buy into their value system, which they firehose down from on high.
"The more fortunate world of luxury"? C'mon, Anon, it's a bottle of perfume, not a frickin' 50-foot yacht.
I wonder why Anon felt the need to hide his/her identity. I did a search on his/her ISP; it came from bigpond.net.au.
I'm guessing it was just some random Aussie who feels the need to feel "fortunate" or whatever. Pity. I would have rather it had come from some anonymous person working in Chanel's head office. Then we could all have fun watching the fireworks.
But what a bizarre comment it was. Even by blog standards.
[AFTERTHOUGHT:] The music in the commerical is Debussy's Clair De Lune, in case you were wondering (Thanks, Anonymous!).
Posted by hugh macleod at December 5, 2004 1:24 PM | TrackBackMaybe the anonymous poster is a random Australian director. ;)
Posted by: boo at December 5, 2004 2:23 PMCould be. I'm now #2 Google search for "Chanel No 5".
Heh.
Posted by: hugh macleod at December 5, 2004 2:40 PMmaybe anon is a buzz agent?
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/05/magazine/05BUZZ.html/
Posted by: david at December 5, 2004 2:58 PMi agree with you, it was a pile of shit. What made it worse for me, is that when i saw it the first time, it was in the middle of "Moulin Rouge". Which i love, which is a marvellous film. And i was horrified that he had sunk so low as to attempt to reproduce the same film, at a much lower quality, for a fucking commerical!!!!! Let's just say my estimation of Mr Lurhmann, fell to the hell.
Posted by: boo at December 5, 2004 5:28 PMI hate that Chanel commercial too.
A while ago I criticized a Pepto Bismol commercial and I received a comment months later praising the commercial. When I searched the IP address it turned out the comment came from someone at Proctor and Gamble, the company that owns Pepto Bismol. Perhaps your comment was from an undercover Chanel agent.
Here is the post:
http://www.standard-deviance.com/archives/2004/06/23/when-youre-sliding-into-first-and-you-feel-like-youre-gonna-burst/
Right.
The advert sucked, and looked like a chopped down version of "Moulin Rouge." Who was I supposed to be sympathetic with? The gay guy (or least metrosexual) who was trying to be sultry, but just looked like a sulky art student, or Nicole Kidman, who was wandering around in a taxi in a feathered nightdress. Wow, that's an experience I aspire to for me and my beloved.
I mean, who did they want to inspire with this, it just looked like a load of corporate cock tugging.
Also, Chanel 5 is a really heavy perfume, I cannot smell it without thinking of old ladies. Now, that might pop somebody's cork, but not mine. (eh, ask me in thirty years and I might feel differently...)
Now, if they had paraded Nicole Kidman butt naked, and then advertised something that smelt like her, well, I would buy that, but I guess that's not what's on offer...
Question of no relevance. How much you you pay for the real smell of a famous film star. (Audrey Hepburn - Players Navy Cut with a hint of bulimic vomit, for instance...)
Hmmm. Time to go and hide in the cardboard bomb shelter again.
Posted by: Hamish at December 6, 2004 4:21 PMi have a friend who's a double agent working behind enemy lines in the PR business, and he confirms that a lot of the big dinosaur firms do, in fact, pay people to scour the internet for any and all mentions, ever, of their product, even in the most miniscule, trivial, venal settings. the sad thing is that some of these employees may actually spend some of their lunch hour defending their clients in blog comments, even though their bosses never flat out "asked" them to troll on their behalf.
oh what a piece of work is man...
Posted by: campester at December 6, 2004 9:22 PMPretty clear, huh ?
Either admire it, or ignore it, do not make absurd comparisons between the world of luxury and the world that is exemplified by fragrance you buy from the drug store
Fit in or fuck off, said with gleaming white teeth and upper lip pulled back into a discreet and charming snarl.
'the world of luxury'...Do we need to hold our pinky at a rakish angle while uttering those words?
Posted by: Joy at December 8, 2004 6:27 PM