29 Comments

Nice idea to connect with the previous ad using a relevant theme.

But I don't think it looks as good as the original...
Jonny Flynn
2011-06-15 11:37:18

Bad CGI.
Stuart Weston
2011-06-15 11:41:12

Looks like Robert Green didn't fancy trying to catch any of those fast approaching balls in this ad then.
Simon
2011-06-15 11:41:14

Really nice up until about 0:31 where it starts to look completely computer generated. Bit of a shame but the link is still nice.
Ed
2011-06-15 11:45:30

A nice idea – green tennis balls through green Wimbledon should work a treat, but, somehow, they don't. The art direction of the original spot has a deftness of touch that isn't quite matched here. Close but no cigar. This also doesn't feel quite real which makes it a little uncomfortable to watch. Maybe it's just because I know Wimbledon well. The ending, with the sofa, is, I think, awful and completely disconnected from rest of the ad. Bring back Fallon!
Polski Andi
2011-06-15 11:45:36

it's good, it was and it is a good idea, and gives an instant "recognizability" of the brand
badinicreateam
2011-06-15 11:50:04

Like it, bet it would look great in 3D!
The Other Ed
2011-06-15 12:12:51

the 3d glasses bit is cringey!
Thomas
2011-06-15 12:21:37

A bit worrying when a brand pays homage to its own ad. And if this post included the original side by side, there's no contest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zOrV-5vh1A
Ray
2011-06-15 12:23:34

agree with the previous comments about the CGI being quite obvious. some vibrancy is lost although with one colour of ball that is to be expected. the thing I hate though is that music Jose was great and added to the magic, this song just sucks
Rich
2011-06-15 13:08:26

The 3D glasses bit reminded me of Istock. This makes me cringe in multiple dimensions.
Rob
2011-06-15 13:19:05

"Two chimps on a Davenport"

to quote Noah Vanderhoff.
Curator
2011-06-15 14:05:46

Hmmm. The CG really is a bit obvious towards the end, shame. Also, the creepy smiling couple with the ugly 3D glasses is far too saccharine.
Andrew
2011-06-15 14:18:16

Bit at the end is a bit cheesy but nice idea. gives you that rye smile. Would maybe be better if it was just an ad for Wimbledon and not for Sony.
Alexa
2011-06-15 14:47:41

starts out nice, but soon the balls look too fake.. makes you think, wasnt there enough postproduction money? any fool can see this is fake. the music doenst go anywhere... vs the original that had the perfect touch on everything. and the end its just too much. its almost on purpose, how retarted can you smile.
John
2011-06-15 15:23:00

is this a Sony ad or an ultra low budget hayfever commercial?
shakes
2011-06-15 17:00:04

One of the reasons the first one was so special was because it was real and not cgi, so a lot is lost here.
To Ray, you have to admit if there is an ad good enough to pay homage to even if its your own, its the bravia balls ad.
A
A
2011-06-15 17:01:44

The balls, it's like you can really feel them coming right at you.
OTC
2011-06-15 17:45:31

Just doesn't do the original justice!
Dont like the music either.

They are the most ridicules 3D glasses.
STRIPEYHORSE
2011-06-15 17:54:17

balls hahaha, nice! connecting with the previous one
tho i never liked the whole idea of 3D ... against it, just dumb
sara scharaf
2011-06-16 08:26:03

TBH if you look at the original ad the balls don't look all that real. Fallon were just lucky that other people shot footage and it leaked online so they had anticipation on their side.

The CGI is completely fine, it's the rubbish actors at the end that ruin it. Besides, this is a digital-only campaign, so you know it was done for next to nothing.
pertater
2011-06-16 09:01:05

I disagree with you Pertater.

1. The balls look very fake, despite them trying some neat tricks it just doesn't consistently work for the whole advert.

2. The balls in the original ad look real because they ARE real.

And now what I think:

The physics of the balls aren't right...they should be spinning more if bouncing down hills for a start, the depth of field is off at times, the motion blur is exaggerated, the scale of the balls is way off in places (look at some pass in front of the Lancaster Rd sign) – thats a fundamental – I would have trouble with finessing the blur, DoF and physics...but scale? Really?

Some of the shots in this section just shouldn't be submitted as they are.

I agree it must have had a low budget – due to the library music and below par CGI (which isn't of calibre I would expect for a Sony ad).

Perhaps the post production has been done remarkably well if you take in to account budget and timescale that we don't know the details of but it falls far short of anything else I've seen from Sony.

The creative idea is pretty nice up until the chuffing awful shot of the couple on the sofa...the less said about the second half (especially the cringe worthy shot of them reaching for the 3D balls that aren't there) the better.

WImbledon as you've never seen it before and never will!
Stuart
2011-06-16 12:00:47

A nice thought around how to communicate the fact that Sony own Wimbledon in 3D. At least they didn't have tennis balls jumping out of TV screens like most vanilla flavoured 3D TV advertising.
beta-love
2011-06-16 12:36:29

Not sure about the CGI quality although nice spin off idea.

Overall pretty good.
James Wallace
2011-06-16 13:22:17

What Stuart said.
Luke Tonge
2011-06-16 14:02:13

We're done.



Rob and I are moving to San Fransisco.
Ian
2011-06-16 15:08:00

3D television! hahaha FAD!
Dave Marsh
2011-06-16 20:08:41

That's beyond bad
ellie
2011-06-16 22:16:50

[deleted by moderator]
david
2011-06-17 04:47:00

Tell us what you think

Your comment: What happens with my feedback?

What happens with my feedback?

We no longer require you to register and have a password in order to comment, simply fill in the form below. All comments are moderated so you may experience a short delay before your comment appears. CR encourages comments to be short and to the point. As a general rule, they should not run longer than the original post. Comments should show a courteous regard for the presence of other voices in the discussion. We reserve the right to edit or delete comments that do not adhere to this standard.

Name: (required)

Title:

e-Mail: (required)

URL