Increase in Commercial Television Puppetry

[D'Snowth]

Has anyone besides me noticed the increase in television puppetry used in commercials as of late?

Previously, they had been few and far between, like the Barnone dog, the Fandango bag puppets, and even the Hungry monster from Weight Watchers... but now, puppets are popping up more and more in commercials - Carfax now has a fox puppet as their mascot, as well as Bathfitters, or some company like that uses a purple monster, similar to Cheeky on YouTube in a mascot role as well. Plus, the Snuggle Bear had been CG for the past few years, and now he's a puppet again.

Nice to know that this is happening, because quite frankly, it almost seemed as if television puppetry, in general, had been in a bit of a lull, mostly because of lack of Muppets since the Disney purchase.

 

[Drtooth]

Wasn't the Car Fax Fox thing like a joke in an earlier commercial.

I swear, since they put that fox puppet in the ads, they've become something better than the lackluster Office clones their commercials were.

And :LOVING how Snugg's a puppet again. The CGI didn't give it the plush toy feel that's the whole point of the product mascot.

 

[Buck-Beaver]

I don't have statistics, but I don't think there has really been a significant increase. What has changed (I think anyway) is that thanks to the internet and YouTube you end up seeing a lot more commercials with puppets than you used to.

Not that I'd be complaining if there actually has been an increase...

 

[TheCreatureWork]

I personally think that Puppetry is the cheaper option compared to computer animated versions of characters. During these economic times the big companies are going back to what is cheaper.

 

[dmoss]

I personally think that Puppetry is the cheaper option compared to computer animated versions of characters. During these economic times the big companies are going back to what is cheaper.

Even still, the Vlassic Pickle Stork is now CGI, rather than 2D animation...for some reason or another.

 

[Drtooth]

I personally think that Puppetry is the cheaper option compared to computer animated versions of characters. During these economic times the big companies are going back to what is cheaper.

Not always....

It depends on to what extent you use the CGI. If it's a big expensive company that does Pixar or Dreamwords quality stuff, it may run a small fortune. But a LOT of commercials use CGIs as a cheaper alternative. it all depends on how much the puppet costs, what kind of mechanisms it has, and how big the thing is. The Pets.com sock wasn't all that expensive looking... but take a large animatronic and that could run you a LOT more than a CGI version of something.

And BOTh a CGI and puppet can be reused. Let's not forget that. So both ways have that economical thing going for it. Full on traditional or digital 2-D hand drawn animations... much MORE expensive. Flash or comparable programs, much MUCh less.

 

[D'Snowth]

Wasn't the Car Fax Fox thing like a joke in an earlier commercial.

Yes, a salesman in an earlier commercial DID use a fox handpuppet instead of showing the customers the carfax, BUT newer commercials use a fox puppet as their mascot: usually, he'll pop up during the deal and prompt the customer to say "Yeah, show me the carfax"; the commercial usually ends with the puppet in front of their website, pointing out all the various features and pages on their site. The puppet seems to be relatively good-sized (maybe about the size of Herry Monster or so), he wears a white carfax t-shirt, and he's obviously a glove puppet with the way he points to the site's features.

I personally think that Puppetry is the cheaper option compared to computer animated versions of characters. During these economic times the big companies are going back to what is cheaper.

Not necessarily... puppetry is NOT an inexpensive artform... a lot of the expenses lie into the creative department: fabric and materials and such, which can cost you an arm and a leg if it's good, quality fabric. Even SCRAPS of foam can get costly.

 

[TheCreatureWork]

Not necessarily... puppetry is NOT an inexpensive artform... a lot of the expenses lie into the creative department: fabric and materials and such, which can cost you an arm and a leg if it's good, quality fabric. Even SCRAPS of foam can get costly.

Read what I write- I didn't say puppetry is not inexpensive. I said it is a cheaper option compared to (good quality) computer animated versions of a character. I know how much I charge for a puppet and the amount of work that goes into it.

I think it also depends on these other factors...
- How fast the commercial need to be turned out
- Size, weight, design of character
- What the character is doing in the commercial
- Budget
- Personal loyalties

The whole CGI vs. Puppetry arguement can be ripped apart and disected for months. What it comes down to is that we all don't really know because we aren't the ones making those decisions as to why we go with Puppetry over computer graphics or vice versa. I'm just saying that from my experience I've been on a couple of shoots where the almighty $ played a huge role in the decisions made.

 

[spcglider]

Which is it, Pantene hair care that has a big pink kangaroo puppet as a mascot?

I've noticed a spike in the amount of puppetry too. Lets hope its a positive trend.

On the other hand, I did notice a disturbing trend a while back that had to do with using the term "muppet" (small m) as a derogatory.

Several times in different instances I have heard things in sitcoms/etc. akin to "What is that guy, a muppet?" or "Quit acting like a muppet!"

-G

 

[Buck-Beaver]

"Muppet" has been a derogatory slang term in the UK for decades. I think the usage of it has just been crossing over here lately.