It seems to me there's some basic code language going on here that is missed by the BBQ man who insists that you never flip another mans meat. Ah. I did not know this rule, mainly because nobody comes near my BBQ it is mine and mine alone, and also... I have no idea what the innuendo is because I am not a gay man but I am pretty sure there's some innuendo here. I feel like a kid watching my parents verbally flirt, I know something is going on but I'm not getting it. Kind of how like the meat flipping guy is so not getting it..... and I suspect a large part of the target market? Publicis has taken over the Heineken account, and they seem to want to do exactly what Wieden + Kennedy, Portland did in 2014 with it. Back then Neil Patrick Harris argued on set with the director about drinking the beer, then rambling on about drinking beer at a pretend party, and about the rules. It was funny because it was mocking advertising regulations with a celebrity who can play ever so charmingly dense. So Publicis called Neil Patrick Harris again to try and continue the gag, and now we have ads with gay sex innuendo. Way to miss the joke made in the first campaign. Can someone please explain to me why a brand switches agency if they want the same ads they did before anyway? As for targeting football fans and the tailgating crowd with these ads (judging by their placement on ESPN and the times), I'm not sure if this will bomb in a room full of straight guys watching the game together or simply make them uncomfortable as they try to decipher the innuendo. I mean I get it, it's a European light beer with a gay man as spokesperson, perhaps they wanted to turn it all up to eleven and we'd hit the magic funny spot, but to me it just seems a little flat. While the previous campaign was an in-joke pretty much everyone could laugh at. We all hate advertising and/or advertising regulations.
