121
Coca-Cola’s new AI-generated Christmas ad is as bad as you’d expect (pivot-to-ai.com)
submitted 1 week ago by dgerard@awful.systems to c/techtakes@awful.systems
38 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 49 points 1 week ago

Time for a yearly reminder that Coca-Cola sales are about to plummet in Sweden.

Every year Coca-Cola sales drop by about 50% in Sweden over christmas as Swedes buy Julmust instead.

I have already stocked up with 12 glorious bottles of Zeunerts Julmust giving me 6 liters, I live alone so this is plenty.

[-] Cris_Color@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

What is the context for this? Is jusmult a culturally significant beverage around Christmas time? Is this a boycott of sorts? What is jusmult like?

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 16 points 1 week ago

I posted a link to the Wikipedia article about it, but yeah it is a culturally significant drink over Christmas, there is no organized boycott of Coca Cola, but I suspect that people enjoy the fact that Coca Cola tanks their sales in Sweden during christmas.

There are several versions of Julmust, there is one company making the syrup, selling it to drinks manufacturers, who all tweaks it to their preference.

The most common/standard version of Julmust is "Apotekarnes Julmust", though "Nygårda Julmust" has expanded a lot, there is one version that I didn't enjoy when I was younger, but is my favourite these days, "Zeunerts Julmust".

The taste of Apotekarners Julmust is quite hard to describe, the texture isn't as harsh as Coke, it is less sweet, and more fruity, it is a more adult taste than Coke, dryer...

The Zeunerts version is quite odd for the uninitiated, it has a darker taste when compared to Apotekarnes, with a weird aftertaste of coffee. When I first had it, I didn't like it at all, but these days I stock up on it.

[-] Cris_Color@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Thats super cool, thank you for sharing!

Maybe someday I'll get to try some, it sounds lovely 😊

[-] Speculater@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

But you'll need more next week!

[-] sprack@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Helt galet när alla vet att påskmust smakar bättre.

[-] V0ldek@awful.systems 28 points 1 week ago

This is probably the least surprising thing ever.

CocaCola is like the symbol of capitalism. Everything they produce is corporate slop. GenAI is a perfect fit -- soulless, artless, hastily slapped together bright pictures that ultimately don't matter and carry no value. The world is not better with CocaCola ads, and it would be no worse without them. They're just there, to be lost in time, forgotten. Like tears in the rain.

[-] Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems 5 points 1 week ago

I'm going insane looking at comments praising the 1995 TV spot, going on about how it makes them teary-eyed and such, and how the AI remake is a travesty. That shit already looked like if you put a Norman Rockwell artbook in the blender, drank the mixture and subsequently got sick on the Vegas Strip.

[-] OpenStars@piefed.social 28 points 1 week ago

But won't someone think of all the extra bonus monies they can pay themselves as a result of avoiding paying human salaries? (Ironically, not even in this one bc the AI was so horrible that it required extensive clean up)

[-] Architeuthis@awful.systems 19 points 1 week ago

No shot is over two seconds, because AI video can’t keep it together longer than that. Animals and snowmen visibly warp their proportions even over that short time. The trucks’ wheels don’t actually move. You’ll see more wrong with the ad the more you look.

Not to mention the weird AI lighting that makes everything look fake and unnatural even in the ad's dreamlike context, and also that it's the most generic and uninspired shit imaginable.

[-] Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

This is crappy and weird but it could have been worse: unlike the Toy's Are U's advert they wisely decided not to include any human. Which in turn makes the caravan of trucks look eerie and sinister. You can't win them all.

[-] dgerard@awful.systems 10 points 1 week ago

there are apparently two other prospective ads that do include AI renditions of human actors and they're as bad.

[-] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

No shot is over two seconds, because AI video can’t keep it together longer than that.

Honestly I think they should have gone full cursed. I think it would have been far more amusing and might actually have garnered them some kudos at least from the terminally online.

[-] 21Cabbage@lemmynsfw.com 6 points 1 week ago

I conceptually don't like that.

[-] Linktank@lemmy.today 5 points 1 week ago

The article mentions Toys'R'Us, was it also written by AI or did I slip into a universe where they didn't go out of business?

[-] V0ldek@awful.systems 11 points 1 week ago

You know, you can just click on the link in the article to watch the ad it talks about

[-] zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com 9 points 1 week ago

Toys r us is still alive in Canada

[-] smokebuddy@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

Still alive, but our local one is shutting down right after Christmas so I don't think it's going great for them

[-] dgerard@awful.systems 3 points 1 week ago

they'll have to comfort themselves with a Coke(tm), apparently it's a Surreal Thing

[-] metaStatic@kbin.earth 7 points 1 week ago

I believe it's a blockbuster situation

[-] Linktank@lemmy.today 1 points 1 week ago

Got it. Thanks!

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 week ago

I mean it's basic and boring but, considering the production cost was probably (a lot?) less than $1,000, compared to the $5,000+ it would've cost if filmed/animated traditionally, that seems like a win. And the average viewer isn't even gonna notice. In fact, they're getting plenty of free publicity for using AI to make it thanks to articles like these

[-] self@awful.systems 20 points 1 week ago

In fact, they’re getting plenty of free publicity for using AI to make it thanks to articles like these

good thing there’s no such thing as bad publicity, otherwise this shit would be fucking embarrassing

[-] Speculater@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

I think your prices are off by about 1000x, but your main argument holds up.

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 week ago

My brain is stuck on 90s prices (I ran an advertisement company as a toddler)

[-] UrLogicFails@beehaw.org 13 points 1 week ago

I don't know the actual budget, but I think it probably cost much more than 1kUSD, though probably still less than real human work would cost.

It's important to note that no shit could last more than a second or two because after that the generated video starts to much more noticably have errors. So at minimum you still need editors (plus the music needed to be composited, etc). Also, as the article notes, all the logos needed to be added in post as well because GenAI cannot reliably do text or logos. With that in mind, I'd guess there was probably a significant amount of "cleaning up" that had to be done in post as well.

With all that said and done, I'm sure the commercial was not exactly dirt cheap, but it WAS probably still cheaper than having dignity and paying humans.

What's actually kind of wild, though, is a lot of these shots just look like bland stock imagery. And since they couldn't have any cohesion between shots because of GenAI's own limitations, the majority of these shots could have been replaced with stock footage and they probably would have only needed to CGI a few different shots...

[-] OpenStars@piefed.social 15 points 1 week ago

What if I told you that the goal was not to make a good product, but to increase shareholder valuation?

In that case, all the "problems" disappear in light of chasing after the singular goal.

[-] froztbyte@awful.systems 7 points 1 week ago

my my, those boots sure must be tasty

[-] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 week ago

I've been boycotting cocacola for years now. Not sure what you're on about

[-] froztbyte@awful.systems 12 points 1 week ago

you do not, under any circumstances, have to "give it to them"

there is no requirement to carry water for this awful shit

do not surprisedpikachu when someone calls out your weird posts

[-] huskypenguin@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 week ago

I would guess the original commercial was in the vicinity of 10 million? And the new one would be like...$10k? Maybe more.

this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
121 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1441 readers
44 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
dgerard@awful.systems