Tolerable TV (Now That's Progressive)

I love writing about bad tv commercials.  It's lots of fun - and there is certainly never any shortage of material.

But let's  face it, with so many crappy spots polluting the airwaves, critiquing them is a bit like shooting fish in a  barrel - it's good for a few, cheap laughs, but it's not exactly a challenge.

Good commercials are a lot harder to come by.  And a lot harder to create and sell.  So once in a while, I like to give credit where credit is due and applaud a campaign that got it right.

Which brings me to the Progressive car insurance spots. You know, the ones with the quirky, brunette spokeswoman, "Flo" (apparently, her name is "Flo", although this fact had somehow escaped me).

The main reason I'm giving this campaign high marks is because it could have gone so horribly wrong. The "Ongoing Spokesperson/Character" is a classic, tried-and-true advertising technique that's been around forever.  When it's done really well, this genre can be extremely effective and memorable (think "Jack" from Jack in the Box or the Geico Gecko).  But most of the time, it's just utterly annoying and obnoxious.

This is one of the hardest types of campaigns to pull off, because so much hinges on the appeal of the spokesperson.  The casting in the Progressive spots is brilliant; "Flo" is played to quirky perfection by Stephanie Courtney, a Groundlings improv actress with heaps of oddball charm and impeccable comic timing. 
I can't help wondering what would have happened if she didn't show up for the casting session that day.  Was there anyone else who could have played this character and made her palatable?  And if there wasn't, would the campaign have been scrapped?  Would they have gone ahead and produced the spots anyway?  Perhaps the scripts were even written with this actress in mind - I'd love to know. 

Let's just say it was a gamble (another gamble was deciding to give Flo a campy, retro look that screams "Look at me - I'm just so quirky!".  There's absolutely no rhyme or reason for this choice, but it somehow works).

Then there's the writing.  I enjoy watching these spots because they're written with a deft, light touch. The dialogue is always fresh, the humor is never forced, and the scenarios play out in a somewhat unpredictable way.  I don't know if Stephanie is responsible for any of this - perhaps she improvised some of the lines? -  but whomever is writing these scripts deserves a lot of credit.  I don't even own a car, and I always pay attention.  On the other hand, I'm not sure these scripts ever looked so great on paper...they rely so much on the performance.

The other reason these spots are effective is because they don't take themselves too seriously and they don't make any attempt at realism.  The setting is a totally make-believe, highly stylized world with a simple white, seamless backdrop and minimal propping.  Can you imagine how painful it would be if they'd played it as a real Progressive office and pretended "Flo" was an actual employee?  Yikes.

It's not that these are really great commercials.  They are fairly traditional. 
I'm sure this campaign won't win any industry awards.  It's not "edgy" enough
and there are no gratuitous special effects.  But that's exactly why I like it; the advertisers manage to serve up a lot of dry information in a simple, clear and entertaining way.  Hey, in my book, any TV spot that I don't automatically mute
is a winner.

Whether you love or hate the Progressive commercials, the campaign must be working, because they keep airing new spots.  A cursory Google search reveals that Stephanie Courtney is garnering tons of attention and fans.  She must be raking in the residual checks.  I'm sure she'll have her own sitcom soon (I'll bet they're working on a pilot as we speak).

In spite of all these kudos, I don't think this is a campaign that can go on forever.  Even this character's schtick begins to get old after a while.  A little quirky goes
a long way.  The spots air so often, they're already beginning to wear out. 
Viewers will soon tire of Flo and her antics and demand something new.
And the poor Creative team that created her will be back to the drawing board (don't be surprised if Flo gets a sidekick).

But for the moment, I'm just relieved that I don't have to reach for the mute button every time these spots come on.  I guess I'm just grateful for small miracles.

 

Comments

[Robert Hatfield]

I agree. They are, I guess, charming. Friendly. They don't try too hard. I like the Sonic spots for the same reason. You may not have Sonic where you are, but you owe it to yourself to check them out. I know a girl who worked for the agency that makes the spots. It took them 2 years to convince the client to try the approach. And they hired a comic team, and they basically improv the spots. I suspect that Flo improvs a lot of her lines. That's why they feel so natural and unforced. It's very hard to write that stuff.

[Marcie Judelson]

Yes, "charming" is the word. Maybe that's why I find this campaign so refreshing. I'm up to here with all those snarky, edgy spots!

I will definitely check out the Sonic commercials. I presume the person you know worked on Sonic, not Progressive? Either way, it's interesting to learn more about the process. Improvisation adds so much.

[Jake P]

The Flo ads represent an interesting dynamic to me. It's not an ad that I particularly *wanted* to like (she's too perky by half), but it ends up being compelling (and a positive association w/Progressive) anyway.

And I'm with Mr. Hatfield on the Sonic spots, which take a risk and pull off a huge win. Plus, Sonic makes pretty tasty grub.

[Marcie Judelson]

I know exactly what you mean. I, too, was prepared to hate these spots, but they took me by surprise. Flo's persona - at least on paper - is a recipe for disaster.
Yet, it works - because the actress is so skilled, appealing and unexpected (and the writing isn't heavy-handed). Just a subtle shift in any direction and it could have been godawful.

[Advair]

Advair prevents the release of substances in the body that cause inflammation.