Monday, May 17, 2010

Which is Worse?

Can I just say I hate commercials?  They are loud, obnoxious, and I just wish I could skip through them always.  But no such luck.  We are subjected to their noise and stupidity.  Okay, every now and then a clever one sneaks in just to throw us off track.  But the commercials I am focusing on are not loud necessarily,  obnoxious ...?  Probably.  Disgusting?  Definitely.  Quick go give the babies something to do.  I'll wait here....ok....good...now we can discuss.

First up is a Victoria's Secret commercial.  Good, I see we are all on the same page here.  Once upon a time this place was class and elegance.  Now....welll... you decide...



Okay.... now let's look at commercial number 2.



Now you may or may not recall, that the Lane Bryant commercial was pulled from the networks, because it was too suggestive and might offend people.  Can somebody tell me how a curvy woman going to surprise her man is more offensive than a bunch of girls rolling around in their underwear?  I'm confused.  

Okay next up.  Carl's Jr.  I really like their burgers, but I am thinking their founder did not have this in mind to sell his product, nor did his wife...



This commercial disgusts me on every level of disgust.  Where's the guy in the faded jeans, no shirt, working his way through his burger?  Come on Carl's give me fairness! 



Seriously? That's their answer?  A dork in a van playing with a hoola doll?  UGH!  What do you think?  Were networks right to pull the Lane Bryant ad?  Are Victoria's Secret ads more or less racy?  Do the Carl's ads border on obscene?  Let's not forget that Paris Hilton ad that DID get pulled a few years ago.  

8 comments:

Shelley said...

Sex sells. It's as simple as that. Women want to look like them, men want to be with them. Solution? Do what the commercials say! Logical? Not in the least.

Nikki said...

I honestly don't think anything should be pulled, I'm all for free speech and what is explicit to one person might not be to another and vice versa. For me, they were all pretty suggestive.

Sandy said...

How about the one I find totally out of place on tv... the one "KY jelly"... "where the woman was totally spent while laying in bed with her guy" he is asking her "did it pleasure you, you know, there?"...
Please lord get that off tv.. they show it in the middle of the afternoon here in sofla???
Also,, Pharmaceuticals, and all the 'risks'! who wants to take them if they will kill you?
Sorry, I don't need to get started on TV commercials...
Good Post!
Sandy

http://thewondersofdoing.blogspot.com/

mormonhermitmom said...

Ha! I didn't even watch them. I've seen two of them already.
Thank heaven the only t.v. I let the kids watch is PBS. Don't need that stuff in their heads.

The Drama Mama said...

I don't think there was anything really wrong with any of them, but the Lane Bryant one wouldn't play all the way through on my pc (figures!). You have to sell a bra somehow, and honestly, a commercial of a bunch of girls in bras is less sexual then others I have seen. AS for the Carls Jr ad, I admit that the one with the bikini model is much more interesting, but that's because I find it hard to believe that she is really acting. Being that skinny and the diet these woman have to put themselves on, I bet you that burger was heaven AND she got paid to eat it!! LOL. Not exactly what you asked I guess.

sarah said...

I was severely annoyed by the Lane Bryant one being taken off the air. It was simply because she was curvier girl. I do not believe AT ALL it was taken off because it was too suggestive. And what? The skinny beeotch in the vic sec. being carried off in a bedroom by a man WASN'T suggestive?? Puhlease.

Christina Lee said...

"Seriously? That's their answer? A dork in a van playing with a hoola doll?"--this made me LOL!!

Holly said...

It is all ridiculous. The dud in the van gives me the heebie jeebies looking at his hula doll and sandwich all lustfully...ick! My son is starting to notice these ads...oh man!