Open letter to Leo Burnett
- Started
- Last post
- 56 Responses
- 23kon0
WOw!
Bunch of c*nts!
- ernexbcn0
Response:
- GeorgesII0
hmm that is pretty low,
but it's not the first time and won't be the last,
at least asylum had the balls to go public,
now they'll never get a contract again
- GeorgesII0
I just finished watching both video and it's quite disgusting,
they could have just given the budget to Asylum to reshoot it,
- exador10
the original by Asylum is far superior...bigger budget or not....the reworked version loses a lot in translation, so to speak...it's not nearly as powerful....
- ideaist0
Advertising = art - soul...
- GeorgesII0
reminds me of when I did the fiat 500 contest,
then they ripped my work and used it as base for a section of the corporate site,
It's not the first time leo burnett does it and won't be the last
http://www.qbn.com/topics/554878…
- utopian0
Just your typical soulless and clueless advertising agency doing what they do best!
- futuremongolian0
"I feel that no one would wish to run an organisation that knowingly exploits young and emerging creativity, as such I am bringing this matter to your personal attention."
They must be new to advertising.
- ETM0
Leo Burnett claims the other production was from script only and the production company never saw the original film. I find that hard to believe.
- 20020
Hey good luck finding another agency to work with you on next shit project.
- Horp0
Lovely piece of film.
Sue the fuck out of them.
- raf0
Didn't Burnett own the first film?
- I fucking hate agencies as much as everyone but this is a good point.Ambushstudio
- 20020
MONZA THIS THREAD
- 20020
MONZA THIS THREAD
- differenz0
Someone somewhere thought that the same idea could be done "better" (or different) than it was done by the Asylum Films. Which is ok, but not fair to give someone else the same job and they literally use almost the same shots and make it more "flashy" looking.
I liked the original Asylum Films one because it had this gritty feel to it, more "realistic" and honest. The other one is more polished, gives a different view on the subject itself.
I think it's cool that Ben Falk came out with this so openly but I don't think it will make a "ripple" nor change anything on similar grounds.
- fresnobob0
I donno... Asylum was hired by Leo Burnett, made work for them, and was compensated for it. Isn't that pretty much the end of the story?
If Leo Burnett wanted to remake it because someone, somewhere in the agency line felt it wasn't up to par, that is perfectly ok, legal, and everything else....
Asylum dudes just had to get all egotistical...
- rootlock0
Not the same job, one was a low budget piece for a Gala one was a high budget piece for Cinema. The script and idea was Leo Burnett and these companies were hired to execute.
The only wrong was Leo Burnett should of reached out to Asylum and communicated what they were doing. But based on Asylum going childishly public they probably had reasons not to hire them back.
Maybe the account got a new account director who has a connection with the new company and loved working with them.
Think about if it was any other industry. I hire a company to paint my house blue , quick job , small budget...they get compensated and do a great job. Next year my wife says I want a darker shade of blue , better paint, maybe some fucking glitter .... but she wants to work with her uncle who is a painter who has ball cancer.
I dont call up company a and explain the situation...that said If headed up another paint job or could still refer them to a colleague if they were a good fit.
- you know this because you worked at Leo Burnett? I've been on many pitching jobs, where the concepts were developed by studios, so unless you know this for sure, you're just speculatingtwooh
- studios. So unless you know this for a fact, you're just speculating.twooh
- thought it was clear I was speculating and explaining a possible ..rootlock
- scenariorootlock