Advertising often utilizes the celebrity voice to push products, and for good reason. These are easily recognizable figures who are larger than life. People who could eat anywhere in the world, but they choose McDonald’s. People who could wear anything, but they choose to shop at Brooks Brothers.
Sometimes these endorsements make sense (like getting the cast of “Mad Men” to hock the new suit line of the same name), but lately I’ve noticed more and more celebrity ads that just don’t seem to make any sense. They’re not wrong, per se, just a bit non sequitur. I think lean economic times are affecting Hollywood too.
I’m sure by now you’ve seen this series of ads with Luke Wilson, the content of which I’m not even going to begin to debate here (the whole Verizon vs. AT&T thing just makes my blood boil). I’ve been searching the depths of my brain trying to figure out what Luke Wilson has to do with cell phones, and I keep coming up empty. I guess he’s sort of awkwardly personable, but there’s no real connection other than his celebrity status.
[Edit – the Wyclef commercial for Ritz has since been taken down.]
When you think of Wyclef Jean, what comes to mind? His music? His roots? His commitment to charity work? Nope. Flaky, buttery crackers and a marching band. While I understand that there is a vague musical connection to the commercial, I don’t see the connection to the product.
This last one is particularly perplexing to me. Throughout the run of Sex and the City, the only thing that was more constant than the girls’ brunch dates was SJP‘s use of Mac computers. From the very start, Carrie typed up her snappy relationship quips from behind an Apple. Whenever Mac came out with a new model, Carrie started using it. So, when I saw Sarah Jessica Parker in a computer commercial, I instantly assumed it was for the iPad. When the HP logo came up at the end, I was flabergasted. Also, I was still thinking about the iPad. Not exactly the greatest brand development.