Was anyone else thoroughly unimpressed with the Bridgestone commercial during the Super Bowl? You probably don’t even know which commercial that was until I tell you it was the one that had San Antonio Spurs’ Tim Duncan in it for less than five seconds (Oh yeah… that one… yeah, that one sucked).
I had to watch it again before I even realized what they were trying to do, and it still doesn’t make sense. I’m not sure if they’re trying to advertise for quiet tires or if they really are trying to say they invented a basketball that doesn’t make any noise when it bounces. If it’s the latter, who cares? Who needs a basketball that doesn’t make any noise? How often do you need to dribble around a sleeping baby?
I would also like to know why they needed Tim Duncan. Was his dribbling of the ball before Steve Nash came in really necessary? Did it add anything to the commercial?
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hwrabc7vVs0&w=534&h=299]
It’s a little silly to dissect a commercial, I know, but this was for the Super Bowl! Super Bowl Sunday is the Cannes Film Festival for commercials, you can’t afford to throw out something that leaves everyone watching saying, “uhh… what just happened there?” And you know, Gary Neal and Tiago Splitter’s commercial was a bit more entertaining.
Get some new advertisers, Bridgestone.
Add The Sports Daily to your Google News Feed!
