I feel really bad for Roger Orlando of the Orlando Law Firm. This is actually a pretty typical lawyer commercial and would be completely unremarkable, except it kind of… sags in the middle of the pitch:
There’s a bit of a meta-question that ATL proposes that maybe this was a deliberate maneuver to spread word-of-mouth about the ad, on the idea that there is no such thing as bad publicity. If so, mission accomplished. But this maneuver is not the sort of thing that inspires confidence in an attorney.
Hey, I can see getting flustered in front of a camera in a way that I might not get flustered in front of a jury. So let’s cut the guy a slackburger for blowing the delivery. But what I can’t figure out is why he didn’t do a second take so he could look a bit more confident and in control. Or were the rest of the takes worse? Couldn’t be.
Hat tips to Above the Law and Barstool Sports for the video. You can see parts 1-3 of this series, and a few other random musings about failures from the world of advertising, back at the old-school “Not A Potted Plant Classic” blog.)
Hypothesis: They did get some good takes but mislabeled which one they were supposed to go with, and this clunker got through. After all, the first 15 second are good.Report
Plausible.Report
What about the producer of this (assuming it wasn’t this lawyer himself). Would he really want his name attached to this?Report
Film editing is your friend.
You can do it. Using the software on your computer.
Obviously, this guy does not have a teenager in the house.Report
I’m not sure he has a television in the house.Report
My fishing phone does great video editing easily these days.Report
And you can use it to catch bass!Report
I think it is more useful for carping.Report
I thought I didn’t need a fishing smart phone, but now I use it all the time, just for the halibut.Report
Brilliant, Aarron. Brilliant.Report
yeah but being semi competent at it is harder than it seems, imovie installs aside.
that said for around 3 grand you could do a great job in most metro areas. for five grand you could do an outstanding job.Report
Has there ever been a good attorney advertisement on TV?
The best ones are really mediocre or servicable at best. I’m thinking Binder and Binder and Jacoby and Meyers.
The best attorney ads I see tend to be printed in glossy print magazines like New York as “Superlawyer” supplements or by having nice websites.
TV ads seem to fall into the local TV ad problem which seems to be an iron rule that all local advertisement is going to be cheesy, corny, and poorly produced even if for a very successful and profitable business.Report
Short version: Not everyone can afford Saatchi and Saatchi.Report
I wonder what a high powered Madison Avenue firm would do for BigLaw — say, a commercial for Skadden Arps. “Are you a Fortune 100 company with an unlimited litigation department that needs dedicated M&A counsel? If so, call Skadden now! Operators are standing by.” Probably not going to happen.Report
Burt,
john st. works cheap. Just, for the love of god, pay them.Report
@burt-likko
Isn’t Skadden more of an Intellectual Property firm? Albeit a very big one.
My guess is that they would create a kind of PSA ad that touts all the pro bono work the firm does while downplaying being involved in a highly controversial piece of corporate defense.
IIRC it is really only Exxon Mobile that has a strategy of litigating everything until the bitter end. Though there are probably others.Report
Also there are TV ads for cars like a Maseratti that almost no one can afford. I imagine a TV ad for a big white-shoe law firm would be more about imagery and PR than drumming up actual business.
How many people decide to call White and Case based on their website?Report
Yes, most are on the low end of mediocre. But a select few transcend into true awfulness. It is these ads which I put under the lens.Report
Yes. This one is amazing.Report
Now I want Captain D’s.Report