Got a blog tip? Contact us
« History Is Coming Soon! | Main | Coke's bogus recycling effort »
Levi's Gay Friendly Jeans - and financial woes

AdFreak pointed out a Levi's ad campaign that uses the same protagonist in two different versions of a commercial: in one, a good tug of his jeans over his hips yanks an exciting new world through the floor of his office, complete with Fantasy Woman conveniently waiting in a phone booth. The second version — prepare to be shocked — is the same commercial shot-for-shot, but this time it is Fantasy Man who just finished his drug deal. (Seriously. Why else would they be using a pay phone?)
The appropriate response to this is to applaud Levi's for marketing to the gay community. It is progress, however small, when corporate America decides that profits are more important than prejudice. So why do I keep obsessing about the wrong things in the ad, like clear evidence of a budget crisis at Levi's?
One, they use the same protagonist in both ads. Perhaps our fictional man is bisexual, but it gives the impression that either they assumed that there would be zero overlap between the audiences for the ads OR that Levi's could only afford three actors. I think they used the same take of the opening sequence for both commercials. I know that CGI and other production costs are expensive, but Levi's can't be in so much trouble that new commercials have to be made with found footage.
Two, what happens when this man tries to consummate his relationship with Fantasy Man or Fantasy Woman? As soon as the modern-day Tantalus drops his pants, the Good World will disappear and he'll be back in the tattered remains of his office, pants around his ankles, sobbing at the destruction he has wrought.
Posted by Charles Star on 09/04/2007 | Permalink
Comments
Aside from amusing us culture editors, how much do you think the Levi's brand is enriched by the sequence, as opposed to Calvin Klein or whatever? The dancing robot car had the same problem. This ad could be for any kind of jeans. Cool-looking video, but poor-quality advertising.
Posted by: Byrd | Sep 5, 2007 10:46:19 AM
I can never tell if an ad is good for the product or just an interesting production. In a competitive industry there is always going to be some amount of brand-leak where an industry leader gets superimposed on whatever brand actually did the commercial. That was the key to the "Head On" ads, which were low-budget, incredibly annoying and apparently very successful.
Posted by: Charles Star | Sep 5, 2007 10:50:53 AM



