Farmed and Dangerous = Flopped and Derisive
Posted Tuesday March 04th, 2014 in Analysis + Strategy.
Farmed and Dangerous
We’ve all seen it – the really good idea that gets beaten to a miserable pulp in its execution. That’s how I felt about Farmed and Dangerous, the new ‘comedy’ on Hulu, underwritten by Chipotle Mexican Grill (CMG).
The question is, why did CMG go from 2013’s gut-wrenching, epic masterpiece, ‘ The Scarecrow,’ to web video junk? In the former, every second was well-thought-out, well-executed, and superbly stitched together into a compelling story. Farmed and Dangerous, on the contrary, doesn’t benefit from good writing, good acting, good music, or even good camera and editing work.
CMG, on the cusp of what I consider to be America’s next great social movement, has aptly chosen to pursue the sustainable food movement. Furthermore, they chose wisely to take a backseat sponsorship role in a story-based medium, which is more than we can say for most brands peddling their goods in a more obvious (and less sensitive) manner.
So, what happened? Why did the production value fall short? Was it a lack of money? That’s all I can think of, given what CMG has done in the past with their visual advertising initiatives. Perhaps most importantly, why didn’t the writers/producers/stakeholders figure out a way to tell this story gently, so that, rather than inciting the entire agricultural community, it just added to the human story of the already fiery debate?
Unfortunately, Farmed and Dangerous may be more Flopped and Derisive. But, at the very least, CMG is showing brands that the new way of advertising is all about telling stories – for better or worse.
Tags
Scroll, or tap/click a list item to filter posts by that tag.
« Advertising: Back To Basics Advertising Internship in CT »