Playgroup | Helping brands build genuine brand equity

To me it shows a lack of imagination doing another gorilla ad. The first one was wildly different and its apparent irrelevance to chocolate made it highly intriguing. In fact, its the first time I can remember advertising where they had completely abandoned product relevance.

Or maybe I do them a disservice – I guess there's probably research that proves that women (chocolate buyers) are sexually stimulated by big, hairy males, that smell and play drums? So when they eat Dairy Milk they are, in fact, psychologically getting it on with the Neanderthal of their dreams?

I actually disagree.

I think these two remixes not only are bleak versions of the first version, but by doing this Fallon to some degree ruins the positive association I had to the first Gorilla ad. I reacted really negatively when I saw it. When the remixed version of the airport trucks came on straight after I just gave up... and it was never that good the first time around.

So I ended up buying a mars bar instead.

The campaign runs on line too - have you seen the mini site?

http://www.aglassandahalffullproductions.com/

Its an immersive, interactive and explorative experience though which you are entertained and educated about Cadbury, its products and history - further strengthening the connection between brand and consumer.

I'm afraid I am with Tim and Johan on this one. The gorilla ad was great, but now since they put a new sound track over the top of it I'm disappointed. I thought that the ad campaign was full of potential, leaving me wondering where it would lead to after the trucks installment, but all i see are the same two ads but with a different soundtrack.
Maybe Cadbury got stuck for budget (possibly due to the failure of the sharing range!) ? or maybe the ad agency got lazy with concepts? Either way I'm left a little disheartened with Cadbury.

[I would like to make a special note to Cadbury: Thanks for the cholocates given out at Liverpool St station last week - excellent new range! If you need anyone to do taste tests for you contact me via the website!]

I'm with Clare. I'd like to think that if a monkey is clever enough to learn to play the drums, that he'd also be clever enough to learn more than one tune.

The disconnect between the product and the subject of the ad is actually a virtue. This positive disassociation works in their favour and the gorilla becomes synonymous with the product.

Brands like Cadbury's have no hidden agenda, no health benefits to push, no new strategy to communicate. They just need to remind us that they're still around, with a fantastic product that is, by it's very nature, pure indulgence.

We're all still talking about it. Job done.

I believe they tried to play it safe, and ended up proving that it was just a one trick pony. It was Phil Collins 'In The Air Tonight' that made the first version, not the Gorilla.

Fallon's Gorilla refreshed the market by ignoring product relevance and once again Fallon are leading the way with their second installment.

Surely this is the first example of credit crunch advertisement to date?

The first time I saw the Gorilla ad I got excited and was intrigued, it was a good experience. The fact that I 'discovered' it online also added to the whole experience. If Fallon at least had re-shot or somehow made the second version feel like I got something new I would have had a positive association. Fallon did this much better with the Sony Bravia ads.