Campaign names best and worst of 2005


According to Campaign, the worst TV ad of the year in the UK was for Camelot. The campaign featured Cold Feet star Fay Ripley as Lady Luck, clad in purple garb with a pink unicorn voiced by Graham Norton. The ads beat out Diet Coke, Mitsubish, Ford Focus, Burger King, Specsavers, Weetabix, Quick Step Flooring and Nobby's Nuts.

The winner of the best TV ad was for Sony Bravia in which thousands of coloured balls are released to roll down the hills of San Francisco. It was followed by ads for Sure, VW Golf, Stella Artois and Marks & Spencer among others.

Campaign has also selected Stella Atrois as campaign of the year for 2005 with their ice skating priests spot, print ads for their film sponsorship (see the all the print ads here), and "Lost souls", "a labyrinthine alternative-reality game that involves hidden passwords and secret codes that enable players to respond to help a woman trace her missing brother."

Creative Agency of the Year went to Bartle Bogle Hegarty, and Dove was named International Advertiser of the Year.

about the author

caffeinegoddess I'm a creative director and copywriter with digital, integrated, and traditional expertise. I love sound strategy and great executions.

Comments (9)

  • silver3's picture

    I don't get it. Seriously. What is the big fucking deal with the Bravia ad?

    Yea. Balls bounce all up and down San Fran. Where's the fucking concept?

    So millions of brightly colored balls treated the streets of SF like Paris Hilton

    on a normal weekend. 2 minutes too fucking long. Boring. Whatever.

    I'd rather see a sea lion cub beaten to death with the corpse of a bunny.

    Dec 18, 2005
  • kamari's picture

    Love the Hilton analogy. I'm undecided about the Bravia ad.

    Dec 19, 2005
  • Dabitch's picture

    Well, I think the Bravia ad is an absolutley fantastic piece of film, and I'm green of envy because I'd love to launch a bazillion bouncy balls down the streets of San Fran and shoot it. The soundtrack is great (Go Swedish artist *rah rah*), the shots are gorgeous (go Danish director and photographer, *rah rah*)... But the idea..? The idea that it's telling us? I think I've seen a few hundred variations of "this TV does color so much better" by demonstrating it - and I watch it on a black and white so the demonstration is lost on me. So in it's thinking, it's not that new, selling a color TV on good color, it's just the most bombastic and big. And dare I say... ballsy in its execution. ;)

    Dec 19, 2005
  • AnonymousCoward's picture
    AnonymousCoward (not verified)

    Obviously you don't get it. You don't have the attention span to get it. Subtlety is lost on you. What makes this ad amazing is the lack of huge concept. It is a simple, beautiful idea, well executed. Nothing more.

    Dec 19, 2005
  • silver3's picture

    Subtlety is still boring.

    I guess the smallest, most fluffy kitten kiss of an "idea"

    wins you over catchermag, but it makes me want to

    punch Al Roker in the throat more than buy a Bravia.

    You're right, it is nothing.

    Dec 19, 2005
  • CopyWhore's picture

    I tend to agree with Silver. What's the big fucking deal with a bunch of colored balls bouncing around SF? Seems like more and more big executions are winning out over big, ballsy ideas.

    As for subtlety, what in the hell is subtle about Bravia? You think you're asking people to make a big leap from milliions of colored balls to millions of colors? Puh leeze!

    Subtlety isn't boring; it's just about respecting the audience's intelligence, and not having to hit them over the head. But the notion of telling a joke with a straight face isn't even an issue here.

    What is the issue is that agencies/clients would rather pour millions of dollars into big executions instead of having the courage to produce real ideas that might make ya squirm. (And that possibly cost a lot less.)

    Dec 20, 2005
  • AnonymousCoward's picture
    AnonymousCoward (not verified)

    The subtlety of the Bravia ad lies in its final execution. Granted the production leading to the execution is far from subtle, but the final product is quiet, succinct, and simple, allowing the viewer to imagine the circumstances leading to such a situation.

    Fallon could have been far more blatant in their execution. They could have replaced the muted Jos

    Dec 21, 2005
  • MaryWills's picture

    It's pretty, but one thing I do wonder is if the ad world is too caught up in it from a production standpoint. Do consumers care so much? Probably not. It's not a bad ad, although i'd hesitate to say it was the best. It is put together well but as others mentioned, the concept is missing and it's also overhyped.

    Dec 21, 2005

Leave a comment