You landed a celebrity for your ad? Great. Use them wisely

—David Pullara looks at how QuickBooks, Advance Auto Parts and HBC could have more effectively used their star performers.—

I’m not surprised how often brands try to leverage celebrities and pop culture characters in their advertisements. I’m surprised by how often they do it poorly.

LiftMaster is a good example of a company that recently did this well. They used a main character from an iconic movie (Ferris Bueller’s Day Off) as the basis for their humorous ad, and it made a lot of sense: one of the film’s pivotal scenes takes place in a garage… and LiftMaster makes garage-door openers.

Further, it’s actually plausible (even likely!) that an adult Cameron Frye would use the product being promoted to protect the car he spent “three years restoring,” because he knows from experience what might happen otherwise.

The resulting spot is both creative and memorable, and because the product fits with the situation and plays a starring role in the commercial, fans would be less likely to feel like the actor “sold out” by doing the ad.

 

But it’s not enough to simply take beloved characters from pop culture (or celebrities that portrayed said characters) and insert them into your commercials. You need to consider if the ad makes sense based on what we know about the character, whether the product is something that could be naturally associated with them, and whether the pairing between the character and brand is distinct and memorable.

Here are three examples from the past year that didn’t work nearly as well as the LiftMaster spot, and some thoughts around what the companies involved might have done better.

“QuickBooks Happy Business: Karate Kid”

Does anybody who watched the original Karate Kid film (or the subsequent Cobra Kai television series) believe John Kreese would have been a kindler, gentler, less “intense” Sensei if he only had more control over his Cobra Kai business? Of course not. But an outrageous set-up and a lack of believability isn’t what’s wrong with this ad.

It’s a complete lack of differentiation.

Here’s part of the script from the ad: “When I started Cobra Kai, the lack of control over my business made me a little intense. But now I practice a different philosophy. QuickBooks helps me get paid, manage cash flow, and run payroll. And now I’m back on top… with Koala Kai.”

The problem is that you can take the text I’ve bolded above and replace it with almost anything… and the ad will still work.

“When I started Cobra Kai, the fact that my feet had warts made me a little intense. But now I practice a different philosophy. Compound W Wart Remover Gel helps my feet look and feel their best. And now I’m back on top… with Koala Kai.”

See what I mean? The plot of The Karate Kid had nothing to do with business management software, and so leveraging the property to promote the product isn’t creative—it’s forced, opportunistic, and disingenuous. Further, attempting to frame John Kreese, the unapologetic villain of both The Karate Kid and the second season of Cobra Kai, as someone with whom we should sympathize is disrespectful to fans of the franchise.

If your advertisement still makes sense when your product is swapped out with an entirely different product, it’s a good sign your ad isn’t differentiated enough. I’m sure everybody remembered the “Koala Kai” ad, but I strongly suspect most wouldn’t be able to associate it with QuickBooks. And for the love of film, don’t try to rehabilitate a classic villain in a 30-second spot!

Advance Auto Parts: DieHard is Back 

The Die Hard film franchise is centred around Detective Lieutenant John McClane, a hero who overcomes impossible odds to stop terrorists from carrying out their nefarious plan. It’s about action, excitement, and explosions! It’s not about batteries or an auto-parts store, and so, like the Quickbooks ad above, the association feels forced.

The two-minute spot is certainly entertaining, and you could argue that because it’s nearly impossible to forget the name of the battery now that it’s been associated with the classic film, it will result in a positive impact on brand awareness.

But the ad doesn’t say anything at all about the product itself, or why it’s better than any other battery I can buy. The ad shows me how a DieHard battery can be used effectively in a fight, and that it can even work after a bullet has split it in half… but is that enough to get me to seek out the DieHard brand the next time I actually need to buy a car battery? Doubtful.

Unlike in the LiftMaster ad, where the product integration makes a lot of sense, the focus on Die Hard (the movie) detracts from the focus on DieHard (the battery). And even if you’re using a hero in your ad, the real hero of the spot should always be whatever it is you’re trying to sell.

Hudson’s Bay: A Call To Joy

My wife and I spent the last three weeks binge-watching all six-seasons of Schitt’s Creek and we’ve become total Schitt-heads, laughing out loud multiple times during every episode. Which is why watching the recent Hudson’s Bay “A Call to Joy” ad was so disappointing for me.

It’s very clear that HBC wanted to leverage the current popularity of Catherine O’Hara and Annie Murphy to promote their brand. But there’s a problem: for the foreseeable future, when you put those two talented actors beside one another, you’re going to see Moira and Alexis Rose.

HBC could have done one of three things to address this challenge:

First, they could have chosen to use only one of the actors. The ad could have been tweaked so that either one of the talented women could have carried the spot on their own.

Second, the actors could have simply called each other by their real names throughout the commercial. The, “Hello? Hello?” bit we see twenty seconds into the ad could have easily been replaced with an “Annie? Catherine?” Marco-Polo-like exchange. That would have made it very clear that we weren’t watching Moira Rose interacting with her daughter, we were watching the actors who portray them… although it’s certainly possible this was intentional, in an attempt to get viewers to see “Moria and Alexis” without HBC having to pay any licensing fees to use the characters.

Third, they could have fully leaned into the association with the show and created a “Schitt’s Creek ad.” This is what I wish would have happened, because the show’s series finale sets this up for HBC perfectly.

SPOILER ALERT: If you haven’t watched the show, but intend to do so, skip the next three paragraphs.

Schitt’s Creek is ultimately about a family that learns being wealthy is not about how much money you have, but the people you have around you. In the final episode, David Rose unexpectedly decides that rather than move back to New York City, he wants to build a life with his new husband, Patrick, in Schitt’s Creek.

They buy a quaint-looking home, and in the series’ final scene, as the “kids” are saying goodbye to their parents (who are leaving to begin a life in Los Angeles), Patrick says, “David and I can’t wait to host you at our place when you come back to visit.”

Two of the show’s central characters just bought a new home. The family has been invited to visit. And HBC is known for, among other things, housewares and home furnishings. The ad essentially writes itself:

Doorbell rings.

It’s Dad, Mom, and sister Alexis, visiting David and Patrick in their new home for the holidays.

Alexis: “Day-vid! This home is so cute! I love what you’ve done with the place.”

David: “Well, I have impeccable taste…”

Moira: “No, seriously, David, where did you get all of these wonderful things?”

Patrick: “We went to Hudson’s Bay…”

The characters could have introduced HBC’s five personas by pointing out various items purchased in the home. HBC could have used the interior of the home as a “window” in their stores. And the audience would have enjoyed a spot that authentically leveraged a hugely popular show to celebrate the special moments of togetherness that HBC says it was trying to promote.

Granted, securing the rights to use the actual Schitt’s Creek characters—and bringing three more actors on board—would certainly have cost more money, but it also would have resonated so much more with fans who were most likely to watch an ad starring Murphy and O’Hara in the first place.

If you’re going to use a beloved celebrity or pop-culture character in your ad, you have to make sure it makes sense.

But when you have a perfect opportunity to leverage pop-culture for your products, don’t waste it.


David Pullara is a consultant, university instructor, and senior marketer who’s worked with Starbucks, Pizza Hut, Coca-Cola, and Google.  

David Pullara

David Pullara is a senior business leader with 20 years of diverse and progressive experience in marketing strategy, brand management, and innovation. He's spent 12 years of his career working with four world-renowned, consumer-centric, Fortune 500 organizations: Starbucks, Yum! Brands (Pizza Hut), Coca-Cola, and Google. David earned his Honors BBA (marketing) and MBA (strategic management, international business) from the Schulich School of Business at York University, and a certificate in “Disruptive Strategy” from Harvard Business School Online. He is recognized as a Chartered Marketer by the Canadian Marketing Association (CMA). In his last corporate role, David was the Chief Marketing Officer for the Hill Street Beverage Company (TSXV: BEER), a publicly-traded producer of alcohol-free and cannabis-infused adult beverages. David is currently focused on consulting, teaching and facilitating, speaking, and writing engagements through his work as Principal of dp Ventures, and serves as a part-time marketing instructor for the Schulich School of Business at York University and a Course Facilitator for the Schulich Executive Education Center. David shares his thinking regularly via his weekly newsletter; you can subscribe at dpthoughts.ca.