Darrell Lea goes 100% palm oil free in bold new TV campaign via Akkomplice, Melbourne
Aussie favourite Darrell Lea is announcing that its entire range is now 100% palm oil free with a bold new phase in its “Darrell Lea Makes It Better” campaign from independent agency Akkomplice.
Says Tim Stanford, marketing director, Darrell Lea: “There is growing awareness of the devasting impacts on natural habitats and endangered species associated with palm oil production.
“Our consumers told us they would prefer our products to be palm oil free. We listened and we took action.”
The campaign kicks off with a TVC, featuring an orangutan partying to the beat of George Michael’s Freedom! 90 to encourage viewers to consider how the choices they make at the checkout can quite literally change the world.
Says Stanford: “The ad of an orangutan in a rainforest perfectly encapsulates our brief which was to announce that Darrell Lea is now 100% palm oil free. It’s a very emotional ad. The eyes of the Orangutan are a great connection.”
Says Sara Oteri, executive creative director, Akkomplice: “It’s not every day that you get to produce work that you know will have such a tangible and positive impact on our world.
“Darrell Lea’s ideas, vision and efforts to change their products have been truly amazing. They are an inspiring client to work with.”
The Melbourne based agency engaged the talents of director Mitch Kennedy and Australian visual effects specialists Alt VFX to bring the partying orangutan to life for the campaign.
Says Stanford: “Akkomplice has again demonstrated their passion for our brand by delivering work that will start conversations and have a tremendous impact on our business.
Says Kenny Hill, founder, Akkomplice: “Darrell Lea is exactly the ambitious and rare breed of client that we love working with. They actively embrace ambitious creative and really run with it, so it’s wonderful to see the incredible success that the brand is enjoying.”
The launch TVC is supported by a national outdoor campaign and educational online content that provides consumers with the full picture of palm oil and how the confectionery company underwent the transformation in its manufacturing to allow for the removal of palm oil from all products.
Client: Tim Stanford, Marketing Director, Darrell Lea
Agency: Akkomplice
Founder & Creative Director: Kenny Hill
Executive Creative Director: Sara Oteri
Account Manager: Nicole Torrington
Graphic Designer: Nathan Herbertson
Production Company: The Producers
Executive Producer: Noelle Jones
Director: Mitch Kennedy
DoP: Kieran Fowler NZCS ACS
Post Production & VFX: ALT VFX
Music licensing: Music Mill
Final Audio Mix: Bang Bang Studio – Tristan Dewey
Media planning & buying: Rapid Media
Digital Performance: Voyance
PR: Birds of Prey PR & Communications
169 Comments
Tell me that didn’t just happen.
Get back to work you low-life industry smucks. Clearly the only people with time to comment here are junior wannabes who haven’t got a clue how advertising works. This ad is genius for the following reasons:
– Market positioning – If you think this ad is designed to pit Darrell Lea head-to-head with Cadbury in a competition for the number one spot you don’t know the first thing about advertising and you should get out of the business before you spend 20 years at minimum wage. You ain’t getting to creative. Ever. Darrell Lea is competing against everyone’s Other Second Choice, not Cadbury. This ad and associated controversy frames choosing a chocolate as a choice between Cadbury and Darrell Lea – no one is thinking about KitKats after seeing this ad. This ad is seeding the idea that when it comes to chocolate; it’s a two horse race, there’s Cadbury if you want the good stuff, and there’s Darrell Lea for everyone else. Darrell Lea doesn’t want Cadbury’s customers; they want every other brand’s customers.
– Controversy – Controversy drives organic recommendations. DL now has a whole bunch of organic content in the form of outrage articles from ‘woke’ advertising purists and die hard Cadbury fans talking about ONLY Cadbury vs Darrell Lea. The controversy has materially increased the likelyhood that someone who views a piece of Cadbury content will organically be recommened a piece of Darrell Lea content. That organic reach could probably justify the entire spend by itself.
– Comparison – But wait there’s more: Darrell Lea is coming out swinging with a ‘two’ to follow up their deftly planted ‘one’. Darrell Lea is further consolidating the idea that choloclate is a two-horse race by framing palm oil as a consumer decision heuristic, something Cadbury wrote the rules on. Cadbury cleaned up their palm oil act years ago and Darrell Lea is smart enough to be able to Google. Thing is, no-one is asking the question about M&Ms or home brand competitors in the block segment, but after watching this ad, they are. This is literally stealing Cadbury’s ad spend and putting Darrell Lea firmly on the ‘right’ side of the palm oil decision, along side the only other main stream brand out there: Cadbury.
– Playing to the Base – Every Darrell Lea fan knows they have to defend their choice against those pesky Cadbury purists, this ad that clearly pokes fun at Cadbury will put a smig grin on every Darrell Lea fans face, further consolidating the Darrell Lea tribe and increasing loyalty. There is incotrovertable evidence of this strategy with the ‘Cadbury’ purple lens flare at 14 seconds. That flash is all it will take to get the average consumer thinking only about Cadbury vs Darrell Lea. They won’t know why but next time they’re in the supermarket and they see the two side-by-side (which they are btw, Darrell Lea appears to have made a conscious effort in their placement strategy to move themselves next to Cadbury) they’ll feel vindicated in choosing Darrell Lea and being part of the tribe.
In short, this ad is PURE GENIUS and places Darrell Lea exactly where they want to be: everyone’s first choice after Cadbury.
Far from what this dolt ridden comment section seems to think, this agency is worth every penny and a hot tip for anyone looking to buy, judging by this comment section, they’re going cheap!
I want D Lea to plant some trees for all those they were implicit in cutting down… great you stopped using palm oil but you were a part of the problem and I need you to pay my usage as I’m not free… I don’t have a home
I don’t know who you are but fucking well said! Meanwhile all the tortured artists are getting hung up on the craft and the details and losing sight of the big picture – the picture that’s making Darrell Lea famous and a lot of money.
wants its ad back.
A chocolate bar. Celebrates joyfully. With a monkey playing the drums.
Are you actually kidding? If you are going to rip off one of the greatest ads of all time, at least try and make it less obvious and less rubbish than this ffs.
It’s an Orangutan, not a monkey. Get educated before you comment.
Orangutans are Great Apes and are in danger of extinction due to deforestation to make way for palm oil farming. Which is the point of the orangutan in the ad.
But Cadbury Gorilla was the best percussion playing primate of all time.
I like the bit with the drumming Gori- …Chimp
Orangutan
Are….. are you serious? This is the most blatant and shameless rip I have ever seen. Every person involved in this should be genuinely ashamed.
Wow. If you’re going to ciopy someone else’s work, particularly if it’s one of the most famous ads in recent memory, it should be better than the original. In this case, it would seem that Darrell Lea does not in fact make it better. This was an awesome brief. Such an opportunity missed. Oh, and who should Juan Cabral send his correspondence to?
i can feel it coming in the air this morning
This is such a beautifully executed ad but how did this idea get approved at concept stage? Would love to have been there for the chat – “Let’s basically just do the Cadbury ad, but swap the Gorilla for an Orangutan and a bedroom for a forest? No one will even notice….”
Surely whoever greenlit this knew Cadbury had already done it.
Epic split for Freightliner?
Epic failure. All this communicates is “If you want the real thing, and something better, go to Cadbury.” A shame, because the brief is a good one – you actually had something to say but chose to screw it up.
Yes its a total rip off, but hey what isn’t these days. I kinda like it and the 3d is pretty good.
From the agency and production co that ripped off ‘Not Happy Jan’ comes this ripoff of Cadbury’s Gorilla.
What the actual?
Absolutely. Shameful.
https://campaignbrief.com/not-happy-jan-darrell-lea-makes-it-better-with-bold-new-campaign-via-akkomplice-melbourne/
It’s fun. Remember when they remade the ‘Not Happy Jan’ TVC? This time it certainly pays homage to the Cadbury Gorilla but there is more to it than juts that. Palm Oil production is directly connected to the loss of habitat for the Orangutans so this move by Darrell Lea will hopefully have a positive effect on the future for the Orangutan. It also cheeky suggests that the other brand with the drumming Gorilla may not be as environmentally friendly now that you think about it. And the execution is pretty sweet considering this was all done with a team working remotely during COVID. I don’t work for any of the related companies but I do acknowledge the cheeky sense of humour, and balls for them to make this work. Congrats to a brave client I hope you sell more Chocolate.
Hey idiots, this isn’t the same as the Cadbury ad. It’s a different song, different colour drum kit and a much smaller monkey!
“Primate”. Actually.
Orangutans are not monkeys.
Wow. Just wow.
Cadbury wouldn’t let you steal its purple, so you thought you’d steal it’s ad? And here I was thinking 2020 couldn’t shock me anymore.
Surely Darrell Lea’s brand essence is ‘Make it worse’.
Cadbury uses palm oil, DL don’t, so there’s a play there. But does it make it a great idea? Evidently not.
You guys are all wrong…
The eyes of the Orangutan are a great connection
https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/yellow-pages-has-come-out-fighting-over-darrell-lea-tv-advertisement/news-story/408feb93c986c6582cc434114b5d1cef
To rip off better, iconic ads.
Seriously, they should be ashamed.
Cadburys have not used palm oil in Aus since 2017. So, no, no that is not the reason or an excuse.
I’m confused.
To A Producer: If you are wanting a commentary on Cadbury not being as environmentally friendly as you think, you could actually do this in so many ways, and not just be a direct ripoff.
As an industry, we are better than this. But are the people in the credits above?
yes it is a rip off. Well done. That’s the point you dumb f**ks.
Cadbury threw their weight around and sued Darrell Lea over the use of the colour purple a few years back even though Darell Lea had been using it in Australia for ages. The case was in the courts for over a decade and Cadbury eventually lost (I think?). I’m guessing this is Darrell Lea’s way of telling them what a bunch of dicks they are.
Did not know that. Maybe ^^^ these guys didn’t either which makes it worse. Eeep.
Just google ‘Cadbury and palm oil’ and see what comes up. They’ve had a long history with unsustainable palm oil and deforestation globally, no wonder Zoos Victoria gave them the boot last year…
Simple. Funny. To the point. I really enjoyed it. Well done.
Doesn’t Cadbury still use palm oil?
Seems like a pretty clever challenge to me. Well played.
Then, in your sparkling vernacular, it’s a f**kn dumb shit idea.
His movements are out of time in everything but the cymbals.
Unsee it.
Funny to see everyone calling “rip-off” to the Cadbury ad. It’s obviously a reference / parody. Pretty concerning to see people working in creative fields not knowing the difference between the two.
Making an ad with clear similarities to an extremely well known, salient, and highly regarded ad that aired 13 years ago (almost to the day) is not a “rip off”. In fact, my money is on this ad is probably taking shots at Cadbury who still use palm oil in some of their products.
And no, I’m not the client or agency before you start throwing around those accusations too.
Maybe if it called out Cadbury’s more directly for using Palm Oil, and was clearer about being a spoof of the original for that reason, it would be an acceptable spot and even a ‘brave’ stance for the brand to take. But by not acknowledging it properly and expecting the ‘something something productions’ line to help consumers make that connection, it just feels like a lame rip off without the humour. Then again, if they can’t actually make that claim against Cadbury’s legally, why would they try to subtly suggest it by ripping off a much better ad?
Watch this, it’s far more entertaining
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0l3-iufiywU
This is clearly a big UP YOURS to Cadbury. It doesn’t matter whether ad wankers like us feel it’s derivative – it IS deliberately derivative.
But if what @KISS said is true (that Cadbury hasn’t used palm oil since 2007), then that changes things big time.
Maybe the strategy is to trick people into thinking that DL’s competitors ARE still using palm oil? Hmmm.
ITS A RIP OFF OFF THE NEW MMM AD.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fti3pX57LMA
If they’d got the same track and spoofed the ad and the wall of the purple studio fell away to be a jungle, it’s quite brilliant.
the commenters on campaign brief are too dumb to get the joke
It is supposed to be a rip off, hence the “A palm oil free production” line in the beginning to nod to “a glass and a half full production.”
Is it still garbage? Yes
Surely a client made them do a rip off. I can’t imagine an agency doing this but then why publicise why not hide behind a rock. Argg so painful to watch
I worry about the intelligence of this industry. Not because of this ad.
It’s clearly a pastiche made clear in the first frame: ‘A PALM OIL FREE PRODUCTION’ referencing the GLASS AND A HALF FULL PRODUCTION.
Don’t be pissed because all involved have utterly failed to make this seem like parody, and have just (once again, for the same bloody client), just ripped off the work of better, braver, more creative brands and agencies.
If I were you I’d be really quite embarrassed.
well done Altvfx. You know the CGI is good when everyone is just bitching about the creative.
Bill Board just made the direction of the idea better…but only if Cadbury are still using Palm Oil.
This is clearly a parody calling out Cadbury for still using palm oil. And quite a good one.
Experience matters. One day this industry will realise that.
In a world full of instagram ads, taking the piss is now misunderstood.
No it isn’t clear.
And that’s the problem.
Put your trousers back on, millennial.
https://insidefmcg.com.au/2020/02/12/cadbury-kelloggs-revise-palm-oil-policie/
They probably could have made the ‘parody’ element a bit stronger, so that we know straight away they’re highlighting their difference to Cadbury. Didn’t quite get there.
As a creative I understand this. I get that it’s a statement about other monkeys associating themselves with choc brands that still use palm oil. BUT, as a consumer I’m not going to draw that link. I’m going to say “wasn’t there a cadbury ad like that at some point?” “Oh yeh it had that other cool song, hold on I’ll google it” “wow that cadbury ad is great, I might go buy cadbury”
If this is indeed a parody aimed at taking a shot at their biggest competitors, that is an interesting approach.
What is going to undermine that is the fact that this brand and agency literally had their last ad together banned for…… plagiarism. For ripping off the Yellow Pages ad, which saw Yellow Pages get an injunction which had the ad pulled.
So, if people mistakenly think this is plagiarism too, well, the client and agency have no one to blame but themselves, surely?
to idea theft.
You might want to also learn that if you’re not number 1, you don’t draw attention to #1. If the aim was to take the piss out of the Cadbury ad, they’ve failed miserably.
Great original chocolate from a great Australian brand. An opportunity missed… again for Darrell Lea.
this is taking the piss out of the cadbury ad.
orangutans are killed by palm oil that cadbury use.
it’s a parody…not copying.
im not a huge fan, but this doesn’t offend me.
chill out, keyboard warriors.
It’s not the consumer’s job to get the ad – it’s the ad’s job to get the consumer. If you need to explain that it is satirical, it has failed. To people saying “Oh it’s tapping into something salient” – you need to go a re-read that Chapter in Sharp. It’s an add that makes people think about another brand – also a fail.
If your brand positioning is “Darrell Lea Makes it Better” the “parody” should be better than the original. And in this case, the original is one of the best ads in recent memory. Even if this is what you were trying to do, you failed.
and shit miming.
Lol at people above thinking that Darrell Lea were seemingly oblivious to the Cadbury ad. It’s most famous ad of all time ffs. This is clearly a direct barb fired at Cadbury.
I reckon this one will break the comments section record. Oh, Darrell Lea…
I fear it is a parody ad gone horribly, horribly wrong.
So everyone instantly thinks of the correct Cadbury reference but barely anyone thinks ‘oh this is a parody’, that’s pretty bad communication skills.
Gauntlet thrown directly at Cadbury. (Can’t believe the Blog don’t get it. Oh hang on, yes I can.)
Well done Sara and the team at Akkomplice.
Orangutans are becoming extinct due to palm oil use. What a brilliant dig at your direct opposition who are part of the problem.
It really is funny how the majority of the idiots here completely miss the point. Or maybe it’s not that funny. But typical for this toxic industry.
It’s intentional! How are people not getting this?!
How is it possible that this many commenters don’t get that this is SUPPOSED to be ripping off the famous Cadbury ad because it is calling them out for using palm oil in many of their products. It is a clever take as palm oil harvesting eliminates the habitats of Orang-utans… Cmon guys!
It’s years too late. It’s just lazy creative. Cadbury have moved on.
With respect to many an esteemed creative, planner, etc. commenting on here, I think we all need to remember this is an advertising blog where we are all pissing in our own wetsuits. The vast majority of consumers who this ad is targeted at will not get the reference/nod/rip of the iconic Cadbury spot. And this doesn’t matter. For those who do, fine. 2007 is a long time ago. We are all talking about it from a critical perspective, which is warranted. But ultimately, it’s entertaining. Consumers like entertainment. They just don’t go that deep.
If you spent half of your creative and monetary resources creating original, relevant and memorable communications rather than parodying (a better word than copying or ripping off, nevertheless, the same thing), you would have half a chance at reinventing your brand successfully. Being talked about for the wrong reasons does not help your cause. Not Happy Jan and now Gorilla. What’s next? The Big Ad? Which you would probably call, The Small Ad, because, it’s a parody. Right?
So much hate in the comments I can feel the spit flying as you smash your keyboards. It’s fucking gross and our industry creatives need to stop being so aggressive to each other. DL is obviously a brave and adventurous client and with increasingly conservative clients, we should be applauding that.
This ad is awesome – on many levels. Yeah, it’s a playful dig at the competitor. Yeah the original Cadbury ad was amazing at the time. But these DL ads are not ‘plagiarising’, they’re not trying to pretend the previous ads didn’t happen; they’re re-writing what modern pop-culture would have been if DL was there at that moment in time. So an ape confined in a purple room for a brand that destroyed forests to make its product, is now replaced by an orangutang living its best life in its natural environment. How can that be going over so many heads? It’s a brilliant campaign and it has endless scope for executions.
The production and execution is amazing. The idea is strong and simple and endless. Love it.
And no, I dont work for Akkomplice or DL.
Sorry. Off to get my “dad bag” now.
LOVE IT
Imagine if anytime BK threw shade at McD, the public response was “omg, didn’t anyone realise that clowns are maccas thing?” They definitely could have made the parody more obvious, but I’m guessing they had to tone down some of the references to Cadbury to avoid another legal battle…
While everyone’s rightly savaging the creative, let’s not forget to also savage the client. They’re banking on the controversy of this ad to hope people don’t notice that their alternative to palm oil isn’t actually any more sustainable than palm oil itself. In fact, it’s less – less regulated, less visible, less knowable – and they’re hoping people won’t look. There was absolutely zero thought internally given to actually “making it better” because their only goal in all of this was to create a virtue-signalling, but utterly meaningless talking point.
I can’t wait to see the next classic ‘Darrell Lea’ ad from Akkomplice.
If people don’t get the reference to Cadbury, their only take away is that Darrell Lea chocolate doesn’t use palm oil. Win win?
I really love this and it lands the message beautifully. Well done to the team at Akkomplice
I think the most tragic thing about these comments is not the people who think it’s simply a (second) rewrite for this relationship, but is actually the people saying “omg how can you all be so dumb?!?!” and then explaining the palm oil/orangutan link like there’s ANYBODY reading this who doesn’t know that.
Let’s pretend for a second that ads are made for the great unwashed masses and not the superior beings that grace the comment section of CB. In this strange alternate universe (where the target audience isn’t just every prick with a bestads login) this ad might just have the goods. It’s funny, it cleared a better song than any Australian ad has for the past 20 years, and it pokes a bit of fun at the competitor. The people who eat DL (my mother-in-law) will froth for this ad just as hard as the day she first saw George Micheal gyrating his hips on Countdown. Get a grip you wankers, we make ads, for companies who already sell enough shit. Spend some time working on your novel, or your shitty band, or go play with your kids, stop shitting on people’s professional lives.
There might be less accusations of plagiarism if the last ad Akkomplice made for Darrell Lea had not been *checks notes* … literally banned for plagiarism
https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/yellow-pages-has-come-out-fighting-over-darrell-lea-tv-advertisement/news-story/408feb93c986c6582cc434114b5d1cef
It’s almost as if *gasp* the DL ads are themed around parodying other famous ads. It’s kinda like they’re positioning themselves as a cheeky underdog. They’re probably going to make an ad similar to Apple’s iPod silhouettes next – and all the industry smoothbrains are going to feel really really smart and sleuthy by calling them out for “plagiarising” another ad.
Wish I had a client who paid me for someone else’s work
This is a certified stupid ad. Regular people don’t care about ads. To get the joke, you’re relying on the public remembering the drumming monkey ad from over a decade ago. Incredibly dumb and waste of the clients money.
The Carlton Draught Big ad comes out:
“OMG this is a copy of that famous big British Airways ad”
“Did anyone check to see that this is a direct RIP OFF!”
“British Airways did it better in 1989, get an original idea!!!”
Could not agree more. How sad has our industry become? Are senior creatives too busy maintaining their yachts right now while the faptard managers have taken over the comments section or have we all turned into turdouchen brains?
Wow, it’s like the commenters here don’t think that’s what advertising should do
That’s the only way to describe this industry and how people treat each other in it. A crisis.
Did any one else notice that the sun flare at 14 seconds is Cadbury purple. I have worked in film all my life and never seen a sun flare this colour. Cadbury tried to sue Darrell Lee for using this shade of purple and Cadbury lost the cast in court. This is a total FUCK YOU CADBURY form DL.
Exactly. Making up non-existent problems to solve to make ads is low. But hey, go independent agencies!
@Bezier
Yeah, but you’re wrong. It’s not ‘incredibly dumb’.
If you don’t remember the Cadbury ad, it makes no difference to enjoying this ad for what it is and understanding the message. This will have the same impact on a 20 year old that the Cadbury ad had on its audience 13 years ago. If you happen to know and remember the original ad, then there is another layer to enjoy, an ‘a-ha’ moment.
I just like the fact that everyone’s talking about something! I don’t want to read the comments! It just feels like people care about ads again, which is nice! What a vibrant community! I love you all!
I genuinely can’t tell if this is brilliant or not. I agree the parody could have been made more obvious, but I’m not sure it really matters for the average punter. If anything, they missed an opportunity to call the Gorilla out more explicitly to bring more people into the joke, but again it’s not necessary, some would argue. One other thing that perplexes me is that this was probably done without any permission, given the agency and client’s work on Yellow Pages, and so it’s more than likely going to be pulled and legal action in some form will follow. And as someone who works in, and loves this industry, I find it to be irresponsible and reckless behaviour that further discredits us all. I’m sorry to say but it’s a bit shameful, not brave.
Thanks mate, now fuck off.
@@Darren
Just giving my opinion mate, without being a prick about it. Try it some time.
Just want to leave a comment so I’m part of the Guinness world record for the biggest recording circle jerking wankfest of all time.
Never change, CB.
This ‘strategy’ literally got their last ad banned from TV. Please do give me the galaxy brain explanation of why this is a genius move from a brand with limited production budgets.
Yeah okay, I guess banning ads in the internet era does absolutely nothing to raise publicity or attention.
You’re completely correct – brands like Ultra Tune and Sportsbet who have ads complained about and banned regularly are not top of mind in their categories.
No brand should ever take a risk and parody any other ad else they hurt the feelings of another multibillion dollar brand or corporate entity and sent a very scary C&D.
Oh, I’m being sarcastic by the way.
I have never seen a comment so clearly from someone who worked on the ad.
I had to pause this like 3 times to see what you are talking about. NO one is ever going to notice this easter egg. Next time make your shade a little less subtle
Who’s going to be the 100th comment….?
If this is supposed to prove that DL are environmentally superior by directly parodying Cadbury’s then it’s too subtle. Most people outside the industry wouldn’t have a clue that it was a dig, so it completely loses the ‘better than the competition’ message altogether.
Then again, if they expect normal people to miss that angle anyway and take this at face value then fine, it’s an Orangutan playing drums in the forest, and a pretty straightforward message that DL doesn’t use Palm Oil. In which case it’s an ok ad. But it doesn’t have the wit or subtly of the Cadbury’s one, so it’s just an ok ad.
The Cadbury spot was done in 2007. For this to work, we need to hope consumers:
a) remember the original
b) realise they use palm oil
c) know what palm oil is
d) give a shit
It fails on many levels. I’ll give the creatives and production company a leave pass, we’ve all been there, and now is not the time many can confidently put their head up to be shot down. Sad, but true. However, that’s assuming a creative didn’t put this up, and the client did.
And I’d almost give the bad attempt at a parody a pass the first time around, but it seems the agency/client want to hang their hat on someone else’s brilliant work, and some how get a bit of the glory from them by taking the piss? And people expect ad people to be okay with this?
Fuck me, as if the average punter right now is sitting on their couch, chin-stroking and nodding assuredly about the subtle genius of ripping off classic advertising from over 15 years ago, and thinking, nice work, I’ll buy it.
That said, it’s run non stop on TV tonight, so maybe if they throw enough shit it’ll stick.
The worst thing is, no palm oil is worth celebrating and standing tall about. Making a fuss about. It’s more than enough of a USP (if it still is…) to stand up on its own, There’s no need for sloppy seconds.
ha ha ha ha this is truly awesome. Did anyone notice the 5G tower in the back of frame at 19 sec?
Clearly this is a statement about the Illuminati spreading Covid 19. Muppets.
Missed a capital letter in the only copy on the ad.
you have clearly never ever watched a Michael Bay movie.
Good parody: the timing is right, and the average persons gets in and enjoys it. Much like a well timed joke.
Bad parody: this piece of gobshite
Love it.
Astounding the number of people calling it a rip-off. It’s been a number of years since I left agency life – but back then people were intelligent enough to see something like this is a a shot across the bow.
Clever.
This little blog attracts the worst little corner of our industry.
Why are you trying to palm this off as your own?
Your endorsement says it all really.
Case closed.
Lots of heated opinions on an advertisement am I right! I wish I got it at first, pretty fun idea though.
Crazy that we’re all going to die one day and we spend our time chatting shit about this.
Looked OK to us. What’s all the fuss about?
That was hailed as brave. And it pretty much has the same ingredients as this debacle. Only fortnite felt like a smart response to something apple did. This feels like a lazy answer to the brief. However I do think both campaigns forget that NO ONE FUCKING CARES ABOUT ADVERTISING APART FROM PEOPLE THAT WORK IN ADVERTISING.
That’s why it’s always best to do something original, on the off chance that people in the real world might like it, and in the advertising world your dignity remains in tact.
If you give this ad the absolute maximum benefit of the doubt, that’s it invoking Cadburys most famous ad to highlight how much better than them they are, that’s still an awful ad.
An ad that ran in the UK only, over 13 years ago? No average Australian is going to know, remember or care about it, let alone connect the dots to see this as some sort of clever shade throwing by Darrell Lea.
To them, it’ll just be a poorly CGI’d monkey playing the drums badly (seriously, non of the strokes are in time with the music apart from the cymbal crashes) and it’ll be forgotten before the day is over.
So, even with maximum good will, this is still just not good.
Now how about jumping over to the Darrell Lea FB page and see what real consumers are saying
Great news on being Palm Oil free
““silence on plagiarism””
Unbelievable, can’t believe they ripped off the John Farnham gorilla!
https://www.smh.com.au/business/gorilla-beats-down-the-door-in-australia-20141112-9kai.html
Turrible, just turrible.
Going Palm Oil free is an amazing thing but ….
– I watched it and wanted dairy milk. I immediately thought I was watching a Cadbury ad… not sure this will do wonders for sales.
– Tbey’ve only just stopped using Palm Oil and now one of the most threatened primates is Free in the jungle. It’s really crass and actually made me feel quite disgusted. Imagine a company like BP – after the oil spill – announcing they were getting out of oil and had celebrating sea life… just because you sell chocolate, you literally were just part of the problem.
Lots of negative nellys here. Good advertising is few and far between, I work in post and have worked on hundreds of commercials, trust me I know.. Take a step back and look at how ad makes you feel… And ffs, how did so many of you miss the joke. Also. Just look at how the public has responded to this.. it’s generally extremely positive. Your not making ads for your self or your Ad community, even though you reward yourselves continually with tiny little trophy’s. Get a grip and question what your up in arms about.
FFS – there is too much wrong with this world already, get off campaign and go enjoy life. We must be the only industry to tear each other down like this. Bloody disgusting. GET A LIFE AND A NEW CAREER.
Yesterday
Father (me) reads CB article
Later that night
Father (me) watching TV with son (12)
Ads come on
DL ad plays
Me – says nothing
Son (12) – chuckles at ad
Me – “So…. what was that all about?”
Son (12) .. The orangutan is happy because his forest is now safe, that’s cool”
The C&D letters accumulated by this Agency and their work is the ultimate judgement. Have a look at their track record. Piling up by the truckload!
What an ad. Your move Cadbury, time to go palm-oil free.
I like it, but what is with the obsession with rangas in Australian advertising?
It works for me – I thought it was good.
Well done and congrats to The Producers, Mitch & Noelle.
Big up to Alt VFX for continuing to deliver seamless CG works.
Nice pictures Kieran.
Thanks to Darell Lea & Akkomplice for educating and trying to make things better out there.
I for one think this is fantastic! good on the client for being brave enough.
I’m just happy to be here.
Nice!
Boom tiss.
For their next ad, Paul Hogan will be throwing a chocolate shrimp on the barbie in front of the opera house.
doesn’t mean we should start ripping ads off.
ads are meant to rip off, advertising is a business tool. if all you pathetic try yards think you’re actually creative. be original, write a song or a movie, paint a painting and see how much your skills are actually worth! losers!
Ouch. Easy tiger.
Did the Cadbury ad run in Aussie?
Also, if it did run 13 years ago who’ll care that much to remember?
Personally, I missed the parody. Also, the CGI was a bit rubbish. Looked like it was from a 2007 cheap movie.
Who cares.
This is pure genius and after I first saw the spot I sat with my mouth open for minutes after, so clever in so many ways. Totally works for the younger generation who may not be familiar with the Gorilla and works bloody brilliantly for those that DO recall the Gorilla and its “unprecedented” popularity and recognition all those years ago. This is riding on the coat tails of Cadbury brilliantly and the fact it may look a cheap knockoff adds to its brilliance. We all know what they are trying to say, hitting Cadbury where it hurts, the fact they can do it so simply is award winning.
Are you the same person who’s posted essays throughout this thread calling everyone who doesn’t agree with your brilliant analysis, a loser?
Oh dear, your fly’s open, mate. Save yourself further embarrassment, we know you wrote this ‘award-winning’ ad. Chill, bro.
…just spend some more on the CGI next time. It looks shite
Again: What @Adverteasing said.
Those eyes.
Brilliant work.
LOVE IT
@Adverteasing – you are my hero.
The hate on this is absolutely insane!
To the person saying everyone knows it’s a parody, if so then why are they calling it a rip-off? It’s one or the other. If you’re calling it a rip-off, by definition you haven’t understood that it’s a parody.
To the people criticising Darrell Lea / Akkomplice for taking on another ad from the past at risk of getting a cease and desist… Do you think they weren’t aware of that? And do you think maybe they’re prepared to take that risk because, I dunno, maybe it worked last time?
To everyone criticising the ad, FFS it’s better than 90% of the crap that’s served up on Aussie TV – or this blog for that matter. It’s a simple, entertaining spot that makes a point.
If you jump on Darrell Lea’s Facebook page for two minutes you’ll see a string of positive comments about both the ad and the initiative. From the actual audience.
I’m not from the agency or client, but I am gobsmacked at the level of hate on here.
This is an absolute spectacular piece of work. The subtle digs as Cadbury are brilliantly worked in. Regardless of whether the campaign works or anyone cares, you can bet this will give Cadbury the kick they need to get their act together, and actually make their products what they should be and the way their customer wants (dont forget that the mondelez motto is to do the opposite of what the customer wants). Brilliant DL, just brilliant
Makes me happy just watching him.
Well done guys!
To all the folks suggesting the rest of us that hate it are idiots who don’t get it, or worse, think it’s okay that consumers might not get the link, are you serious?
So you’re okay that the punter doesn’t know the idea is a complete rip off of a classic spot? Or a client who has no problem stealing their competitors work for their own benefit?
At least if there was some slim hope Australian couch jockeys recognised the parody then there’d be a germ of decency. But if they don’t and just see a badly timed CGI drummer, then that’s one of the most epic, immoral fails I’ve seen in a long time, let alone championed. Truly shameful.
Why are you calling it a complete rip-off?
It’s an intentional rip-off, ie a parody… To make a point!
Something can’t by definition be both a rip-off and a parody.
So if you’re calling it a rip-off you clearly haven’t understood that it’s a parody!
If you are such a high-horse, put your name to your comments. You are quite the big mouth, aggressive, insecure. Anyone who works with you must dread you entering the meeting.
You are clearly the client. No one else would ever give enough of a shit to write a bloody essay of justification in an ad blog. The mere fact that you felt the NEED to write the essay clearly outlines how shit the spot is in the first place. Ask more from your creative agency. There are lots of other agencies that would love the chance to work on this account.
@@Adverteasing – “If you are such a high-horse, put your name to your comments. You are quite the big mouth, aggressive, insecure. Anyone who works with you must dread you entering the meeting.”
Well if the pot aint calling the kettle black.
DISGUSTING. Go take a long hard look in the mirror.
There’s a common observation that the average age of those working in the advertising industry has been dropping over the last 10 years or so.
Based the level of immaturity displayed in the comments posted to this thread, perception is well and truly reality.
This is ad is so blatantly a parody of the Cadbury Gorilla ad. And it’s a pretty good one at that.
So please. Move on. Grown up. Mind your manners. Brush your teeth.
Does not.
It does so
Bloody hell. Why can’t we all move on and give credit to DL for not using palm oil? Shouldn’t we be celebrating this?
Anyway, I can’t wait for my kids to come home with a fundraiser box of DL orangutans where a percentage of funds go to the forests that Cadbury is annihilating with greed.
Hope DL consider recycling their packaging next. That’s would be cute.
I now vow forever and always to never buy Cadbury, Mars or Nestle products.
@Adverteasing – nice theory piece. Now go into real world test it with real people and see how much of that flies.
My tip, it’ll sit right alongside people having conversations with brands on social.
Just remember peeps.
Soon there will be no forests. No animals playing the drums.
All we’ll have is a glass and a half of full cream dystopia.
…The only thing that will survive is the cockroaches – and phil collins.
Great parody.
The Cadbury ad may have been famous but really it was meaningless trite – still to this day has only its shock value to speak to. Fame is great but better when it is meaningful
Fame.
This Is where this ad shits all over it because it actually is tied to the USP, which also happens to be meaningful. This is the advanced version of the Cadbury ad, and ticks so many boxes in one ad, including fame from ripping off the category leaders ad, CSR, primate-love which is stronger with rangers than gorillas I’d think and more – it is mind-boggling the genius of it. Well done!
This is great work in every way. Darrell Lea is outgunning Cadbury and who’s even thinking about the rest? Simple. Brave. Brilliant.
Never go full retard.
Oi ranga, you’re dead ….