Favorite Quotes: Volume X

Fooled you.

No inspirational quotes from Presidents today  No quick missives on how to not have to advertise.

Today’s edition of ‘Favorite Quotes’ is sponsored by 13; And you don’t get just one quote, you’re gonna get a whole bunch of ’em.

Click below to be the one of the very first to see two versions of monster post-opening 13 quote ads for this Sunday’s newspapers.

We had a choice:

Version #1

Version #2

So, you know the game . . . what would you have done?  Pretend you were in that ad meeting.  Which one would you have run?

Comment below with your choice.

But I’m not gonna tell you the answer.

Pick up a Sunday NY Times, Newsday, Bergen Record, Star Ledger or Journal News to find out what we did.

Tags:
Comments
  • NineDaves says:

    while i like the “13 reasons to see 13” campaign, i’d go with the first ad for the following reasons:
    1) the 13 reasons you’ve pulled aren’t necessarily specific to 13. they could be for any show, and i think that takes away their value. whereas the last quote on the first ad (about the first kiss) is pretty specific to 13, and really sums the show up well. you couldn’t use that quote towards, well, phantom of the opera.
    2) the first ad shows the whole diverse cast. that automatically speaks to a louder audience.
    3) the layout of the first poster just pulls me in more. it seems more fun, more exciting. it complements the show well.
    look forward to seeing what you decided!

  • Josh says:

    Version 1 seems to have a lot more energy and the quotes really “punch” out. That would have been my choice.

  • WildBird says:

    I like Version 1 hands down. “Radioactive Energy” leaps off the page and drew me in to read the rest. In version 2 there are too many things that have equal importance so all I really look at is the kid. He’s cute and I’m sure very talented but he doesn’t make me want to spend $100.

  • K. Brumana says:

    I hope that you picked Version #2. The other one seemed to pull your eyes in a million different directions. Number 2 was quick, simple, and had your “star” front and center. Well more, front and to the right, but you get the point. I am all for giving the other actors ad time, but you need to “brand” that actor and your show… so #2 all the way.
    (Are you ever going to tell us? I don’t want to have to hunt down a Times, yes it is that hard here in Small Town USA! Maybe the library has a copy, hmmm)

  • Tamra says:

    Although I feel choice two is a little bit easier to read, I think choice one is the better choice.
    I feel its more eye catching, and I love how each of the pictures seem to make each quote more than just words on a page. It brings the youthful spirit to attention 😀

  • Brian Teasley says:

    Verion 1 is better. It helps the reader identify the target audience (“whether you are 13 or not”), contains 2 descriptive statements that describe it as a musical, does a better job calling up the emotion of one’s first kiss, and takes the reader on a mini-“joy ride”.
    Verion 2: “A gem of a show” and a “captivating cast” are both somewhat meaningless.

  • Braden says:

    Version 1. Its way more fun.

  • CapedCrusader says:

    Haha. I love it when you can pull random words from a negative review, mix in some punctuation and quotation marks, and you instantly turn it around AND make it seem like the original author wrote it. Nice!
    Come on…. From the producer who preaches Producing 2.0 and being more honest and open with audiences, this is such an old fashioned and misleading technique. Be better than that Ken Davenport! We know you can.

  • Nate says:

    I’d go with neither, actually. I think they should be mixed up a bit. I like the eye popping layout of # 1, but I like the “13 Reasons…” gimmick line of #2. If the IDEA for #2 could be laid out like #1, then I’d call that a winning ad.

  • Nate says:

    I’d go with neither, actually. I think they should be mixed up a bit. I like the eye popping layout of # 1, but I like the “13 Reasons…” gimmick line of #2. If the IDEA for #2 could be laid out like #1, then I’d call that a winning ad.

  • I’d have picked #2. Cleaner and sharper focus.

  • Version 1.
    But I would pull the “raw rousing score” block and give more room to SHOW the radioactive energy, giving the visual space to make the pictures of the kids larger.

  • Kendra says:

    Version 1.
    Like others above, I like the idea behind version 2, the first is more exciting. 2 is rather repetitive, visually.
    It draws me in immediately with the pop of “radioactive energy” at the top and makes me want to keep looking. I also love that each cast member is on display (those kids deserve it!). It’s also just really freakin’ cute. =)

  • Robert Argueta says:

    Version #1

  • Tara says:

    I’d go with version #1. The quotes are much more specific to the show as opposed to version #2. (Although I do love the “13 reasons” gimmick)

  • David says:

    Version 1-
    Bigger type, more kids, overall a lot more fun. Graham Phillips isn’t enough of a name to carry a poster. Anonymous kids work better.
    Plus, that last quote about the first kiss is fabulous.

  • Well, I KNOW which one you went with, and I think it was absolutely the right choice. Rock on!

  • Clayton says:

    I’d have to go with Version #2. Sad as it sounds, people don’t like reading big blocks of text all at once…it frightens and confuses them, and even though there are 13 quotes on version 2, each one is small and easy to digest. Plus, the fact that the number of quotes ties in with the title is a big strength…it can only help solidify the title of the show in the minds of the readers. Definitely version 2.

  • Kathleen Kaczan says:

    I would run Version # 1 for several reasons:
    It is visibly more appealing, “Radioactive Energy” really grabs your attention.
    There are pictures of the whole cast not just one actor.
    As your reading the reviews you are catching a glimpse of the show.
    It looks fun and entertaining as opposed to Version # 2, which doesn’t really pop.
    The only thing I would think about is moving the Name of the Theatre directly under the last review as opposed to having it the very last line of the ad.
    After reading such a great advertisement I would want the location of where to see it to stand out just as much. Just my opinion.
    Kathleen Kaczan

  • Adam says:

    I like the concept of the “13 Reasons” better than version 1, which is a generic ad. As far as text, content, and concept, Version 2 would have been hands-down my preference, except for one thing: the cast photos in Version 1 are a big improvement over Version 2.
    Version 2, with just one kid, looks too much like “Billy Elliot”. Unless that’s what you intended: “Oh, my, Mabel – you mean to tell me this isn’t the show about the little fellow that dances?? We just paid $121.50 for tickets!”

  • mark says:

    The winner hands down is #2 – 13 Reasons..but it should’na had more pix of the kids…PROBLEM..don’t know if I should bring the kids..8.9&10. Is the show too hip for my parents ?
    Where’s that quote that tells me what age kids this show is right for? I also want to see a pix of the 13 yo musicians…
    Where’s your logo..13 needs to have kids pop out all over it!

  • Andy Jensen says:

    Version #1
    This version:
    ~ reveals the 13 young talents we’ve heard so much about;
    ~ communicates the ensemble nature of the show;
    ~ centers around the title;
    ~ pops out key words from the quotes and invites the viewer to keep reading.
    Version #2 blends all the quotes together and makes the show look like a community theatre production of Brighton Beach Memoirs.

  • Danielle says:

    I’d have to go with version #1. At a glance (and that is all that you have in a newspaper advertisement), version #2 looks too much like the advertisement for “Billy Elliot”. I know that it is not exactly the same, and that you used “13 reasons to see 13” instead of white space. I like the first version because it seems to capture the energy of the show and it does not look like any other show advertisements.
    I don’t live in New York, so could you clue us in on what you actually used?

  • I’m in the Version #1 camp. They’re both good, but the first one is energetic and celebratory. The first one makes me excited to see the show. Your eyes move around the page, and you jump from quote to quote and the accompanying pictures.
    The second one is good, but that’s more of an ad used after the show has been established and has been a success. It seems more like a reminder. I didn’t read the quotes because it was lumped together like a lumbering paragraph. I thought, “Yeah, people liked it.”
    Congrats on the reviews!

  • Brian says:

    I like version #1 better. The pictures with the quotes are more engaging. Version #2 reads like a thesaurus. I stopped reading about halfway down.

  • Grace says:

    After showing this ad individually to 10 of my friends (college students) with 10 seconds to look at them (a generous amount of time for someone looking at a newspaper) they divided almost evenly between the two in terms of which one they liked (6 liked Ad 1 and 4 liked Ad 2).However, when asked which one the public would like, it was much more strongly for Ad 1.
    When asked why they liked the ad they liked: Ad 1 was cited for looking attractive and fun; ie for having several photos and arrangement of boxes. Ad 2 was cited for being more informative, having a list, and neater arrangement of boxes. Most of them could not remember a single quote from either ad after 10 minutes. The only quote remembered by 2 people appears in both “Radioactive energy.”
    For me, both ads have their pros and cons in terms of quotations and pictures but one of them reminds me more of the musical. When I saw Thirteen, I loved how the music, cast, and dancing seemed to overflow with energy and excitement. Also, energy seems to lie at the core of this ad (being the only quote my friends could cite). In the end, my own personal preference is for Ad 1 because I feel it captures the spirit of the musical better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

X