One Client, Two Powerful Ideas
Both of these print ads were honored with gold Clio awards last weekend. Both are fantastic, obviously. Simple but imaginative—just like the Lego brand itself. It's no fluke Lego has been behind some amazing advertising over the last few years. This is a client who understands creativity.
But pretend you're the client. You need to pick one idea to roll out in your new worldwide campaign. Your German agency (Jung von Matt AG) brings you the top idea. Your Singapore agency (Saatchi & Saatchi) brings you the bottom one. You know both are great, but you also know you have to choose one. Which do you choose and why?
Comments
For myself, if I had to pick one... I think I'm leaning more towards the Saatchi & Saatchi ad with the hangar. Simply because we've all seen the (old) builders sitting on the I-beam before, and while it is still effective, it's because of that prior association with the classic image I'd go otherwise. It focuses on the shock value of the kids more than the product.
The hangar by Jung von Matt AG is simple and exemplifies the power of imagination that LEGO was, is, and will always be. There is the power of creativity in the product.
Great find!
But although they're both very strong, IMO they both miss their target audience (unless it's focused on the parents instead of the children).
The second one would be clearer and more to the targetaudience if it was a "finished" lego airplane in the hangar with a proud kid (you know the pose, crossed arms, smile on the face) in front of it...
I think the first one could be better if they replaced the city by a duplicate city in lego (in the same angle and vintage colourscheme)
I agree with Madwinis.. I think they are both great adverts - for adults. Purely because the top one evokes memories of that original photo of the old men... Again agree with the above comment, the bottom one would be much better IMO with perhaps a half built plane..
In fact I love all of Madtwinis' suggestions! lol
As for target audience, all I can say is that when I was a kid I had very little disposable income. I bought little Lego sets with my pocket and birthday money. All of the "big ticket" castles, moonbases etc etc were presents from my parents and other doting relatives.
The second one is fairly obvious, even without the Lego logo. Beyond the first viewing, one can go on to read things into the image, whatever they like. That would make it more clever and imaginitive, of course, but at first glance, we know what it's all about---kids or adults.
The second one is great because it just dares you to imagine putting all those lego bits together into the plane that is supposed to be in the hangar. It challenges the imagination the way lego does.
However, I vote for the top one.
Though this has nothing to do with the question you posed, I have to say: every time I see your icon, I am reminded of Frank Sinatra, because the man in this picture looks very much like Frank Sinatra.
Just thought you should know. Thanks for your time.
--qeiii
I don't care much for the hangar ad, if only because it doesn't seem to have any relationship to the reality it's supposed to be replacing. I look at that ad and see an airport tarmac, a windsock, and a small-plane hangar, then there's this pile of yellow LEGO bricks in there. Is this normal for an airport scene, to have a big pile of construction materials loaded inside a hangar? I didn't see the comparison it was trying to make, so it lost me. (Maybe if the bricks were half-assembled into a LEGO airplane? I don't know, it's probably Just Me.)
I like the Builders of Tomorrow ad, but not as much as I should. Wouldn't it have been more striking if the buildings in the background were digitally altered to look as if they were built of LEGOs? Or does that defeat the purpose? I'm trying to view these exercises as if I were a First Day advertising man asked to Speak Truth To Power on an ad campaign, without any real experience yet. And I'm having a lot of fun doing it!
Great ads.
Nice to meet you btw. ;)