Greenpeace Wastes Time Explaining SUV Driver A Prick

suv_greenepeace_prick.jpg

Here's another one of those commercials that takes far too long to make its point, poorly at best, which, in :30 could have accomplished its goal rather than wastefully taking :90. The spot urges people to despise SUVs by illustrating how fellow office workers despise the guy who owns an SUV. More pompous nattering from Greenpeace.

by Steve Hall    Jul-20-06   Click to Comment   
Topic: Bad, Commercials   

Enjoy what you've read? Subscribe to Adrants Daily and receive the daily contents of this site each day along with free whitepapers.



Comments



Comments

Sounds like you might own an SUV. Ha!

What really bugs me is people who own SUV's and then complain about gas prices. Well, duh. If everyone had a small, more efficient car, demand in the U.S. would drop and hopefully gas prices would follow. Although there are a lot of other factors (like war in in MidEast, car owners in China and Indian, etc.). But it would be a start.

Posted by: Some guy on July 20, 2006 3:39 PM

Oops. I guess I should have done spell check before I posted that last one. Writing "in" twice and "Indian" instead of India. My bad. I know how people can jump all over typos here.

Posted by: Some guy on July 20, 2006 4:14 PM

I fully agree with your judgement on Greenpeace's pomposity, but I feel the campaign will resonate strongly in the UK where big 4x4s have been the focus of many anti-SUV campaigns.
Whether the opposition is against their size, emissions or safety, I believe that it is starting to have an effect.
Britain is a small, crowded island.

Posted by: FishNChimps on July 20, 2006 6:07 PM

You seem a little pissy today. Do you drive an SUV, perhaps?

Posted by: tom on July 20, 2006 7:54 PM

You forgot to add an importnat point about this ad, Adrants: It's good.

I own an SUV and it made me uncomfortable. In fact, it made me so incomfortable that I have now decided to leave it parked and carpool with my wife.

Posted by: Corey King on July 20, 2006 9:18 PM

Lets see here we are going to park all of the SUV's (except mine)then it will be all of the big rigs, all delivery trucks, cabs they go next, trains, the big birds in the air that fly over this state, farm tractors....It's late I'm tired.
Sounds like B.S.to me. Bitch about gas prices, we were all doing that when it was thirty cents a gallon. I grew up in the oil fields in Oklahoma as a welders brat. We don't have a shortage, never did.

Posted by: roy on July 20, 2006 11:34 PM

-_- you're an idiot: "Tags:Greenepeace". If you can't even spell the name of someone you're gonna bitch about then keep your mouth shut. Spewing ignorance pollutes the environment. Now be polite and cover your mouth when you speak so we don't catch your stupidity.

Posted by: Blah, blah, blah on July 21, 2006 12:07 AM

I agree that the ad's too long, but you must be one of those SUV Drivers (or an aspiring one) who thinks the world revolves your country and that global warming is a myth created by the UN, Greenpeace and other lunatics. As the ad rightly says: SUV drivers are wankers

Posted by: Thys on July 21, 2006 2:58 AM

Wow you guys read too much into his criticism of the ad.
As a car guy, SUVs have their place. You just don't need to commute in them. But for families that have a boat or horses what are they going to do? drive a car and a truck at the same time?

Anyway I think the new trend is going to be more smaller SUVs built on car platforms. That new land rover LR2 is going to get 25 mpg combined. That's pretty good.

Even the big new Tahoes have cylinder deactivation and can get almost 20. and they haul big boats.

Hopefully now that we have more than one sub $70,000 car with 500 hp we can focus on mileage.

Posted by: Dave. T on July 21, 2006 8:27 AM

Does that mean I'm a saint cause I ride my motorcycle to work?

Posted by: Recluse on July 21, 2006 9:16 AM

For the record. I do not own an SUV:-)

Posted by: Steve Hall on July 21, 2006 4:40 PM

More pompous nattering from Greenpeace indeed!

First off, I'm not a lover of SUVs, but I've seen Greenpeace (which I supported many years ago) shoot themselves in the foot a number of times before.

Fool that I was, I watched it twice. Saw the guy with the frizzy hair pushing his glasses up his nose with his middle finger - what a cute little gesture. Watched the woman spitting in the coffee, then delivering it to the guy with a smile. What's with that, and what's with the lunchroom alienation? What advertising genius dreamed up the I AM A PRICK papers stuck childishly on the back of the guy's suit jacket, like the grammar school "kick me" signs?

Then as we see the guy go in the parking area, we see the caption:

The city gas guzzler

This is followed by the shot of WANKER written in the dust on the back window of the SUV as it pulls out.

They ask, "What does your car say about you?"

His car says the he works for a living and can afford the vehicle, that's what it says! It also says that Greenpeace can actually alienate people from their cause with such ads.

Change this to More Pompous Nattering from those WANKERS at Greenpeace... indeed!

Posted by: Amphigory on July 22, 2006 8:11 AM

While I agree that the commercial was unnecessarily lengthy and a bit over the top, the message it conveys is right on the dot. Oil, believe it or not, is a limited resource; a resource that is diminishing at an increasing rate. It makes absolutely no sense to waste such a precious, dwindling resource on an SUV that you would put to the same use as you would a small, economical vehicle. America's irresponsible, inconsiderate obsession with SUV's is a perfect example of the gluttony we are known, and despised for around the globe. It saddens me that Europe is also suffering from this epidemic of wankerism.

Posted by: David on July 24, 2006 5:02 PM

At last, greenpeace have produced a thought provoking and well put together ad which should make every city dwelling SUV and 4x4 owner sit up and think about their responsibilty to the environment. If not, then they should consider this: if we in America adopted the same fuel efficiency standards as Europe then we would not need any oil from Saudi Arabia. A sobering thought.

Posted by: Red on July 25, 2006 9:11 AM

This is the same Greenpeace that goes all over the world in a bloody great big diesel powered ship, is it?

Posted by: Sam Tana on July 26, 2006 5:36 AM

And as we all know Diesel is more fuel efficient than gas.

Posted by: Red on July 26, 2006 11:47 AM

As well as CO2 polluting, Greenpeace may have been taking a dig at SUVs' dangeropus driving. Supposedly the increased sense of security of being protected in an SUV makes them more careless drivers. New Scientist have just summarised a New Zealand of over a 1000 SUV drivers which suggested SUV drivers are 55% more likely to drive carelessly. I was struck by this because I've been wondering why the two near-collisions (and near death) cyclist accidents I've seen in the last year both involved SUV drivers failing to see the cyclist crossing the intersection in front of them and just avoiding bludgeoning them with their granny-killer bumper bars. In both cases I was behind the SUV in a van with the same height and veiwing platform. I saw the cyclists. The SUVs drivers did not. On both occasions the SUV drivers looked annoyed and began to abuse the cyclist. No "Sorry I threatened your life."

Posted by: pip on January 20, 2007 11:02 AM

As well as CO2 polluting, Greenpeace may have been taking a dig at SUVs' dangeropus driving. Supposedly the increased sense of security of being protected in an SUV makes them more careless drivers. New Scientist have just summarised a New Zealand of over a 1000 SUV drivers which suggested SUV drivers are 55% more likely to drive carelessly. I was struck by this because I've been wondering why the two near-collisions (and near death) cyclist accidents I've seen in the last year both involved SUV drivers failing to see the cyclist crossing the intersection in front of them and just avoiding bludgeoning them with their granny-killer bumper bars. In both cases I was behind the SUV in a van with the same height and veiwing platform. I saw the cyclists. The SUVs drivers did not. On both occasions the SUV drivers looked annoyed and began to abuse the cyclist. No "Sorry I threatened your life."

Posted by: pip on January 20, 2007 11:33 AM

As well as CO2 polluting, Greenpeace may have been taking a dig at SUVs' dangeropus driving. Supposedly the increased sense of security of being protected in an SUV makes them more careless drivers. New Scientist have just summarised a New Zealand of over a 1000 SUV drivers which suggested SUV drivers are 55% more likely to drive carelessly. I was struck by this because I've been wondering why the two near-collisions (and near death) cyclist accidents I've seen in the last year both involved SUV drivers failing to see the cyclist crossing the intersection in front of them and just avoiding bludgeoning them with their granny-killer bumper bars. In both cases I was behind the SUV in a van with the same height and veiwing platform. I saw the cyclists. The SUVs drivers did not. On both occasions the SUV drivers looked annoyed and began to abuse the cyclist. No "Sorry I threatened your life."

Posted by: pip on January 20, 2007 12:18 PM

As well as CO2 polluting, Greenpeace may have been taking a dig at SUVs' dangeropus driving. Supposedly the increased sense of security of being protected in an SUV makes them more careless drivers. New Scientist have just summarised a New Zealand of over a 1000 SUV drivers which suggested SUV drivers are 55% more likely to drive carelessly. I was struck by this because I've been wondering why the two near-collisions (and near death) cyclist accidents I've seen in the last year both involved SUV drivers failing to see the cyclist crossing the intersection in front of them and just avoiding bludgeoning them with their granny-killer bumper bars. In both cases I was behind the SUV in a van with the same height and veiwing platform. I saw the cyclists. The SUVs drivers did not. On both occasions the SUV drivers looked annoyed and began to abuse the cyclist. No "Sorry I threatened your life."

Posted by: pip on January 20, 2007 12:19 PM

The more ads the better, there are some people who will still be driving their SUV around when the price is $8 per gallon. These are people who are single, with no boat no horses and commutes by themselves to work. It is no longer a matter of being able to afford it. Also it is no longer an option for you to think you can still drive your ego around disregarding the working class family that is driving a 4 cylinder and having problems making ends meet because of the high gas prices. High gas prices that are partly to blame by all these SUV and truck drivers in the city that mainly use their autos to commute. No this is no longer an option, we are all in this together and yes, conservation, a word that the Bush Administration does not know will help.

Posted by: Larry K on July 30, 2008 5:45 PM







Featured FREE Resource: