home! mail me! grab RRS 2.0 feed

Volkswagen: Outrageously rich

Advertising Agency: DDB, Milan, Italy
Creative Director: Vicky Gitto
Art Directors: Aureliano Fontana, Cristina Marcellini
Copywriters: Bruno Vohwinkel, Valerio Le Moli
Director: Richard Frank D’Alessio
Production Company: New Partners


* * ½    

del.icio.us Digg StumbleUpon Technorati

killbill said,

June 3, 2008 @ 10:10 am

Strano posizionamento.
L’avrei capito di più per mercedes.

Lucio said,

June 3, 2008 @ 11:10 am

boh! a me non piace, a me non funziona.

Ryan said,

June 3, 2008 @ 5:59 pm

Typical DDB. Maybe this is lost on me because I’m American but this ad makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I’m not sure anybody out there thinks of the “new VW Polo” as being an Over the top rich person’s vehicle.

Volkswagen needs to highlight the fact that the Polo is one of the most fuel efficient cars around, and they need to highlight their extremely low environmental impact. These are things that people can identify with.

Do they mean “Outrageously rich” the way that a piece of chocolate cake is “Rich”?

If so, then this play on words is completely lost. There is not a strong enough correlation between a rich person (who would install immaculate security around their expensive car), and a rich as in “excessive”.

Furthermore, the Polo is anything BUT excessive.

0/5, well shot, clever videos, but not for the polo.

Lara said,

June 5, 2008 @ 2:23 pm

Secondo me funzionano!!!
Sono simpatici e ben realizzati.

Head said,

June 5, 2008 @ 2:43 pm

Nice. Very nice.

Andrè said,

June 5, 2008 @ 3:48 pm

Belli i soggetti con il cane e con il tipo che balla!
Il terzo soggetto è debole e con un meccanismo già visto.

Sorin said,

June 6, 2008 @ 1:49 am

I don’t get.
Just how expensive is this new Polo? And why would anyone want to highlight that in their product?

But said,

June 6, 2008 @ 9:57 am

Rich is not expansive. Rich is rich. Rich in features, for expemple. Or not?

Ryan said,

June 6, 2008 @ 5:10 pm

Rich is not expansive. Rich is rich. Rich in features, for expemple. Or not?

I think that is what they’re going for..

The problem is that its just a TERRIBLE play on words. Its not funny, or clever, its just stupid.

Andrada said,

August 27, 2008 @ 11:51 am

Yes - the 2 meanings of “rich”. Don’t like it. Very common… let’s interpret the word another way…

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment