Page 1 of 1

Beatles for Sale

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:20 am
by tapehead
From Saatchi and Saatchi, the gentlemen who brought us this Doc Martens campaign;

Image
Image
Image
Image

An ad for disposable nappies, called Luvs, set to the tune of a particular Beatles song. The Hook? "All you need is LUVS'

Idolator wrote: Procter & Gamble wants Luvs to be all that parents need.

Its new "All You Need is Luvs" marketing campaign uses the classic Beatles song "All You Need is Love" to spread the word about Luvs' Bear Hug Stretch diaper.

Bear Hug Stretch is the extra stretch added to the side tabs, which affix the front and back of the diaper, at no extra cost. The campaign is designed to offer a fresh approach to keep the brand relevant and top-of-mind with mothers. Saatchi & Saatchi, N.Y., created the execution.

The tune will play an important role in this new effort. "The song helps us break through the diaper advertising clutter and simply communicate to moms that Luvs diapers are 'all you need' to keep your baby happy," Saatchi & Saatchi account manager Mark Rolland said in a statement.

In the first 30-second spot, "All You Need is Love" is played in a light rock style over a scene where a family is enjoying quality time together. The father playfully encourages his son as he plays and tumbles with his favorite teddy bear.

Call me naïve, but is this what the Baby Boomer generation has come to--marketing its nostalgia for a diaper? I'm kind of dreading the thought of how far ad agencies can take this concept.

Luvs Aims To Be All Parents Need


Source: http://tinyurl.com/2a9tnh



Spew righteous bile below, or tell me I'm just being precious and this sort of thing happens all the time.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:24 am
by Nordling
It happens all the time, but you should still be pissed off about it. That first picture offends me. We all know Kurt ain't in heaven.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:27 am
by tapehead
Surely if the Cobain pic offends, the Ramone, Strummer and Vicious pics deserve some ire, let alone using Beatles songs to sell nappies.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:29 am
by doglips
It happens all the time. Proctor and Gamble have probably bought the rights to All you need is love, thus giving them more payback when they inevitably re-release it in six months. Cynical? You have to be where mega-corporations are involved, there whoring for money knows no bounds.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:30 am
by Nordling
It's a little too late to fight city hall on this sort of thing.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:35 am
by tapehead
Oh sure, it's nothing new, but dissent starts with saying so, and consent is almost always mute.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:36 am
by Nordling
Well, since I'm not buying any Doc Martens any time soon, I'd say the ads were ineffective. But that's also because it would look damn ridiculous for a 37-year-old guy to buy and wear Doc Martens.

Or diapers, for that matter.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:43 am
by Seppuku
Nordling wrote:We all know Kurt ain't in heaven.


According to the Gospel, if you pray for Kurt's soul, you won't go to heaven either.



I guess if all those rockstars have been used to sell magazines at some point, it doesn't seem likely that no one else will try to cut in on the action. Nothing is sacred. Especially when you're in the industry of being famous. Death doesn't necessarily break that contract.

:cry:

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:48 am
by tapehead
True, But Lennon isn't hanging out with his Docs on - When he said "Imagine there's no Heaven", I think he probably meant it literally.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 8:51 am
by Seppuku
tapehead wrote:True, But Lennon isn't hanging out with his Docs on - When he said "Imagine there's no Heaven", I think he probably meant it literally.


Plus, he was vegetarian, so I don't know how much he'd be into the idea of promoting chunky-ass leather boots.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:14 am
by Chairman Kaga
seppukudkurosawa wrote:
tapehead wrote:True, But Lennon isn't hanging out with his Docs on - When he said "Imagine there's no Heaven", I think he probably meant it literally.


Plus, he was vegetarian, so I don't know how much he'd be into the idea of promoting chunky-ass leather boots.

Vegetarian and Vegan are not always the same.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:40 am
by Maui
That is just very very tacky.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:50 am
by Seppuku
Chairman Kaga wrote:
seppukudkurosawa wrote:
tapehead wrote:True, But Lennon isn't hanging out with his Docs on - When he said "Imagine there's no Heaven", I think he probably meant it literally.


Plus, he was vegetarian, so I don't know how much he'd be into the idea of promoting chunky-ass leather boots.

Vegetarian and Vegan are not always the same.


As a vegetarian, I have to say that those vegans are one creepy bunch of pagan, neo-druidic sickos. Whereas vegetarians do productive things like include recipes for lentil soup in their song lyrics (Paul McCartney, Maybe I'm Amazed), vegans sit around all day on their islands, thinking about who to sacrifice to Odin next. No offence if any of you are vegans, but I don't want you around my children, or your children around my children.

Also, I know John Lennon was a vegetarian, not one of those sociopathic vegans, because I know he did this interview in exchange for some chocolate olivers.




(:wink: @ vegans)

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:55 am
by HollywoodBabylon
Kurt looks beatific though, doesn't he? - like a little boy lost. Maybe he's thinking "at last I'm forever free of my darling Courtney. 'Cause there's no way that mad cow's EVER coming up here."

Vicious, meanwhile, looks like a low-grade rent boy loitering by St. Peter's Gate.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 11:56 am
by Fried Gold
Tape, you've posted these before

Too many "herbal" cigarettes methinks.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 12:05 pm
by St. Alphonzo
So does Michael Jackson still own the rights to the Beatles back catalogue? If so, all the more reason to despise him.

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 9:25 pm
by DinoDeLaurentiis
Fried Gold wrote:Tape, you've posted these before


Holy crappa, I thought I was a losing alla my marbles, eh?

Anna locking...

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:45 am
by doglips
Fried Gold wrote:Tape, you've posted these before


This thread is about the Beatles back catalogue being used for advertising - Tapes was referencing those Doc Martin ads as it's the same advertising agency. The paragraph and question below have nothing to do with the pics, so I'm unlocking this....

St. Alphonzo wrote:So does Michael Jackson still own the rights to the Beatles back catalogue? If so, all the more reason to despise him.


I was wandering the same thing, I'm sure he auctioned some of the rights off?

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 4:52 am
by tapehead
Thanks DL - I pm'ed Dino and Fried about their mistake, and I'm sure they would have seen the obvious error of their ways - just as we can all see it, glaring and quite apparent. Plus Fried Gold cast aspersions upon my mental capacities, which hurt my feelings.

This thread is about hating Michael Jackson... and Saatchi & Saatchi - Advertising agency with a bankrupt imagination who, repeatedly, appropriating and commodifying collective cultural memories to sell instead.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 5:02 am
by doglips
Shame must go to Jackson's lawyers ( who does own the rights to all the Beatles songs ) I suppose - I assume they are the people who sold the rights to an anti-commercialism song to an ad agency. Genius or irony? Whatever it is, it sucks.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 5:06 am
by magicmonkey
Yeah, for all the hate that Wacko Jackson gets, at least he owned and protected the Beatles music. Until he was forced to sell them recently, hence this debasement of beatles music and why it will all of a sudden start to appear oo all those best of 60's Cd's that always had a strange absence of "beatlemania" in their alternate universe 60's tracklistings.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 5:10 am
by tapehead
I thought Jackson had to relinquish some of his Beatles assets. There are articles as far back as 2005 speculating that he would be forced to sell:

http://tinyurl.com/c9l6w

I was actually under the impression he sold some back to Paul McCartney.

The track in question is most often listed as authored by 'John Lennon with contributions from Paul McCartney' on recent compilations.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:16 am
by DinoDeLaurentiis
magicmonkey wrote:Yeah, for all the hate that Wacko Jackson gets, at least he owned and protected the Beatles music.


Yes, yes... unna'less, of a course, you count a the Nike ad inna the 1986 which was a the first ad to feature a the Beatles song, eh? Inna this a case, Jackson sold a them a the rights to a the goddamn "Revolution," no?

Anna the rest, of a course, she is a the history, eh?

Anna donna forget a the Saatchi anna Saatchi anna their famous Superbowl ad for a the "Just a For Feet" store a couple of a the years ago, eh?

The ad opens with a shot of white men in a military Humvee tracking the footprints of a barefoot black Kenyan runner. The men drive ahead to offer the runner a cup of water laced with a knockout drug. The runner drinks the water, and immediately collapses to the ground, unconscious. While he is passed out, the white men force a pair of Nikes on his feet. When the runner awakens, he sees the sneakers and begins shouting and flailing. "No! No!" he cries. He then scrambles to his feet and runs away, still trying to shake the shoes from his feet.


Hehehe... it takes a the lot to shock a the Dino these days, eh? But holy crappa, I could not have a believed a my eyes after I saw THAT one!

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:19 am
by doglips
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:Anna donna forget a the Saatchi anna Saatchi anna their famous Superbowl ad for a the "Just a For Feet" store a couple of a the years ago, eh?

The ad opens with a shot of white men in a military Humvee tracking the footprints of a barefoot black Kenyan runner. The men drive ahead to offer the runner a cup of water laced with a knockout drug. The runner drinks the water, and immediately collapses to the ground, unconscious. While he is passed out, the white men force a pair of Nikes on his feet. When the runner awakens, he sees the sneakers and begins shouting and flailing. "No! No!" he cries. He then scrambles to his feet and runs away, still trying to shake the shoes from his feet.


Hehehe... it takes a the lot to shock a the Dino these days, eh? But holy crappa, I could not have a believed a my eyes after I saw THAT one!


That's a brilliant Dino joke, right?

I'm going to look for it on youtube, say it's a joke!

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:24 am
by DinoDeLaurentiis
It's a not a the joke, eh?

Anna it aired as a described during a the coveted 3rd quarter spot, eh?

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:26 am
by SilentBobX
Damn, I saw the header for this and thought that Yoko finally snapped and cut up John Lennon's body for auction.

But still didn't see this coming either. Sad, very sad

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:30 am
by DinoDeLaurentiis
Oh anna by a the way, it's a still a the Jackson who owns almost alla the rights to a the songs, eh?

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:54 am
by Doc Holliday
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:Anna donna forget a the Saatchi anna Saatchi anna their famous Superbowl ad for a the "Just a For Feet" store a couple of a the years ago, eh?

The ad opens with a shot of white men in a military Humvee tracking the footprints of a barefoot black Kenyan runner. The men drive ahead to offer the runner a cup of water laced with a knockout drug. The runner drinks the water, and immediately collapses to the ground, unconscious. While he is passed out, the white men force a pair of Nikes on his feet. When the runner awakens, he sees the sneakers and begins shouting and flailing. "No! No!" he cries. He then scrambles to his feet and runs away, still trying to shake the shoes from his feet.


Hehehe... it takes a the lot to shock a the Dino these days, eh? But holy crappa, I could not have a believed a my eyes after I saw THAT one!


Never saw it - but that one ^^ is pretty shocking!! Hard to imagine they got away with that.

The Doc Martens ad doesn't bother me at all - and using The Beatles for nappies isn't any different from a thousand other commercials that use recorded music in their ads :? :?

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:12 am
by tapehead
mostly Lennon with a little MacCartney wrote:
Love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love.
There's nothing you can do that can't be done.
Nothing you can sing that can't be sung.
Nothing you can say but you can learn how to play the game
It's easy.
There's nothing you can make that can't be made.
No one you can save that can't be saved.
Nothing you can do but you can learn how to be in time
It's easy.
All you need is love, all you need is love,
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.
Love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love, love.
All you need is love, all you need is love,
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.
There's nothing you can know that isn't known.
Nothing you can see that isn't shown.
Nowhere you can be that isn't where you're meant to be.
It's easy.
All you need is love, all you need is love,
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.
All you need is love (all together now)
All you need is love (everybody)
All you need is love, love, love is all you need.



I think that used to mean something to somebody, and that it is essentially an anti-capitalist anthem - I'm just marking the fact that that time has clearly passed.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:16 am
by Doc Holliday
I don't know about that - but with what can only be described as a false sense of security, I did poo in my pants whilst reading those lyrics.

Goddamn subliminal advertising.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:20 am
by thebostonlocksmith
Of course there was the Heinz advert for 'Let it Beans'

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:22 am
by tapehead
But there wasn't actually, was there?

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:23 am
by Doc Holliday
...not to mention the upcoming Road Safety Ad featuring "I (wish I'd) Saw Her Standing THere"

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:29 am
by SilentBobX
thebostonlocksmith wrote:Of course there was the Heinz advert for 'Let it Beans'


I thought it was a Depends commercial for "Let It Pee"

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:30 am
by tapehead
...and with that, I think we're done.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:33 am
by thebostonlocksmith
Doc Holliday wrote:...not to mention the upcoming Road Safety Ad featuring "I (wish I'd) Saw Her Standing THere"


That's brilliant...

and then there was the Savlon commercial from the 80's 'While my anus gently weeps' (ok, so it's not as good, but that other one was pretty special)

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 10:14 am
by DinoDeLaurentiis
tapehead wrote:...and with that, I think we're done.


Poor tapes, eh? This a thread, she never did quite get off onna the right foot inna the way you had a hoped, no?

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:02 am
by DennisMM
I can't believe that no one has made a Lost reference yet.

You all, every-buttie
You all, every-buttie

Worse almost than Jackson licensing the Beatles songs is that he bought the largest part of the Northern Songs catalog only after McCartney informed him that he might look into buying up publishing rights to a hit song or two.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:07 am
by DinoDeLaurentiis
Yes, it was a this stab inna the back that ended their "friendship" inna the 80s, eh?

Anna by friendship, of a course, I mean "Paul sucking uppa to a the King of a the Pop a to make himself socially relevant again," eh?

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:08 am
by DennisMM
Say, say say what a you mean, no?

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:10 am
by thebostonlocksmith
DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:Yes, it was a this stab inna the back that ended their "friendship" inna the 80s, eh?

Anna by friendship, of a course, I mean "Paul sucking uppa to a the King of a the Pop a to make himself socially relevant again," eh?


Weren't Paul and Linda in the thriller video??

I think that there will soon be a little buying back of the rites to these songs... considering Jackson is completely pot-less...

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:13 am
by Doc Holliday
I'm surprised he hasn't auctioned his kid off to either Jolie or Madonna in a closed bidding war...

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:21 am
by thebostonlocksmith
Doc Holliday wrote:I'm surprised he hasn't auctioned his kid off to either Jolie or Madonna in a closed bidding war...


Why pay for Michael Jackson's children when you can get a poor persons kids for free???

I think Madonna has a t-shirt with that on it...

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:27 am
by DennisMM
Also, Michael Jackson's kids apparently are white, genetically. Not a trace of Jackson DNA in any of them, it's said. Far less attractive to third-world-baby shoppers.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:35 am
by thebostonlocksmith
I also find this to be more then a little odd...

Did the 'natural bleaching process' mean that it also changed Mr.Jackson's DNA?? Both the children also have blonde hair and blue eyes...

I think Michael Jackson is a Nazi sympathiser...

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:40 pm
by DennisMM
Scarier than the joke is that Michael supposedly hates having been black because 1) father Joe Jackson abused him and 2) as he was getting into his teens, Mike started looking like Papa Joe. Rather than face his father in the mirror every day, Mike got the two nose jobs and pushed it further and further until he looked nothing like Joe or most humans.

Re: Beatles for Sale

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:01 pm
by Seppuku
Ever wanted to hear the awesome fuzzed-out 10-minute version of Revolution by The Beatles that fans have been dying to listen to for decades? Well now you can. Revolution, Take 20. I love it! If they'd released that baby on The White Album like they intended, My Bloody Valentine, Yo La Tengo, all of those noisily melodic rock bands might have come about a couple decades earlier. It would have been like the Velvet Underground-effect sped up, because, well, it's The Beatles and everyone wanted to be them! Also, screw the haters, Yoko's backing vocals on this are sublime!

Re: Beatles for Sale

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:58 pm
by Fried Gold
Seppuku wrote:Ever wanted to hear the awesome fuzzed-out 10-minute version of Revolution by The Beatles that fans have been dying to listen to for decades? Well now you can. Revolution, Take 20. I love it! If they'd released that baby on The White Album like they intended, My Bloody Valentine, Yo La Tengo, all of those noisily melodic rock bands might have come about a couple decades earlier. It would have been like the Velvet Underground-effect sped up, because, well, it's The Beatles and everyone wanted to be them! Also, screw the haters, Yoko's backing vocals on this are sublime!

Sounds like an unnecessarily long version of the slower, Lennon-preferred White Album version.

The single version is the best one.

Re: Beatles for Sale

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:17 pm
by Seppuku
Fried Gold wrote:
Seppuku wrote:Ever wanted to hear the awesome fuzzed-out 10-minute version of Revolution by The Beatles that fans have been dying to listen to for decades? Well now you can. Revolution, Take 20. I love it! If they'd released that baby on The White Album like they intended, My Bloody Valentine, Yo La Tengo, all of those noisily melodic rock bands might have come about a couple decades earlier. It would have been like the Velvet Underground-effect sped up, because, well, it's The Beatles and everyone wanted to be them! Also, screw the haters, Yoko's backing vocals on this are sublime!

Sounds like an unnecessarily long version of the slower, Lennon-preferred White Album version.

The single version is the best one.


Maybe songs that long are an acquired taste. I'd say over half the albums in my collection have tracks 8 minutes or longer. If done right, there's a point in these mantra-like tracks where the music stops becoming an external thing and starts taking control of your body. It's hard to say, as I've known the first couple of versions since before I was born (mum was a big Beatles fanatic), but I think this is my favourite.

Revolution 9 was taken from one of these takes by the way. Though Lennon fiddled with it like crazy on his tape-splicing machines at home and turned it into something else.

Re: Beatles for Sale

PostPosted: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:51 pm
by DaleTremont
Seppuku wrote:If done right, there's a point in these mantra-like tracks where the music stops becoming an external thing and starts taking control of your body.


Hippie!