Five Crash the Superbowl finalist predictions

That's like 2 days from now!

On Thursday morning Fritolay is finally going to announce the 5 consumer-made Doritos commercials that will have a shot at airing during Super Bowl 46. According to USA Today, this time around, Doritos received a record 6,100 Crash the Superbowl entries!  You don’t have to be Rain Man to figure out that that 6,100 entries and only 5 finalist slots means that each submission has pretty much a 1 in 1,220 shot of making the next round.  So it’s pretty much impossible to guess which ads will wind up winning.  But I love a good challenge so just for the heck of it, I thought I’d take a shot and list five entries that I predict will make the Crash the Super Bowl finals this year.  Of course, if I get even just one of these guesses right I’ll feel pretty darn proud of myself.  Like I said…the odds are kind of ridiculous here.  But I actually suspect that 2 or maybe even 3 of these commercials will make the final five.

It should be noted that this short list doesn’t represent my personal favorite Crash the Superbowl entries.  These are the submissions that I think the judges at FritoLay are most likely to pick based on their past choices.  I’ll present my 5 choices without commentary.  To watch an ad, just click on the image:

Bird of Prey
Kitty Heist
Imaginary Fiend
My Friend Archie
Sling Baby

Actually, I have one more prediction I’d like to make; since there were 6,100 entries and since I apparently only watched about 60% of the submissions, I’m guessing that one or two finalists will be entries I’ve never even seen before.  If you have any predictions of your own, feel free to post your opinions in the comment section.   And be sure to stop here on Thursday morning to find out just how wrong or just how right my picks were.

22 thoughts on “Five Crash the Superbowl finalist predictions

  1. I think the spot titled “Bearded Chick” is hilarious. Looks likes real commercial, with good acting and production values. Most of the entry’s are crap, I must say, but this has a really funny twist.

  2. That’s interesting that you picked Sling Baby, I thought I remembered reading in your review of it previously that you didn’t think it was funny? You think the cuteness of the baby will make the judges want to pick it? Wasn’t it not even in your top 25? Just curious on what changed your thoughts.

  3. Jared,

    Lol….I was wondering if anyone would notice that I included Sling Baby on this list but not on my Top 25. To be blunt, I don’t like Sling Baby. The old woman was miscast and the “bully” was really annoying. Plus the idea is basically just a (very expensive) attempt to copy the kind of ads that Doritos seem to like. In the last two installments of the contest, the winning ads featured jerks who teases dogs by offering them a dorito. Then the dog outsmarts the jerks and gets revenge on them. The writer of sling baby must have figured that dortitos wouldn’t pick another video about a jerk teasing a dog so he or she made the protagonist the next cutest thing possible; a baby.

    So it’s just a re-packaged rip off. But after thinking about it, I realized that even though it’s unoriginal, it’s probably just the type of thing the doritos judges will (unfortunately) like. Honestly I hope I’m wrong. I’d really like to see some unusual choices for this year.

  4. Whether you find Sling Baby funny or not, it’s really, really uncool to discredit a well done effort. It’s very unprofessional for you (who entered the contest + run this site) to use your bully pulpit to jump at every chance to point out why you think your competitors are unoriginal, rip-offs (this time in a ridiculous round-about way) or shouldn’t be picked by Doritos. You do it this type of praise and backhanded discrediting often and it lowers your credibility.

    I have no affiliation with Sling Baby.

  5. I don’t think he has given any backhanded unprofessional reviews and/or commentary. I think that’s a little short sided to accuse him of that simply because he has an unfavorable opinion of a video. People have come to this site asking for his opinion on the submissions, that’s the nature of offering your reviews, of course some are going to be negative. If people don’t find value in his advice and reviews they can take them with a grain of salt. The only reason I am writing this is because I have seen other Video Contest websites offering reviews that are extremely unprofessional and belittling, and use the website for an ego trip, and I don’t think that’s what has been on this website whatsoever. Because of the obnoxious tone of the other website I choose not to read it anymore, and anybody could do the same with this site, and that’s that. As long as the reviews are based on the content and merit of the video, there’s no problem with pointing out why he felt they were not a strong contender.

  6. @ Jared Anderson – I agree with the first 1/2 of your last sentence.

    This video was ranked by Beardy as Top 5 in a pool of 5000. He then discredited 2/3 of the casts, stated the idea was an “attempt to copy”, that is was expensive (how would he know), he stated it was “re-packeaged rip-off”, “unoriginal,” and “unfortunate” that Doritos will like it (how would he know). That goes beyond opinion and hints at slander. These are not factual statements, he is making assumptions and trying to connect loose associations.

    I really don’t see how the content of the video deserves that kind of language. He is not pointing out why he felt they aren’t a strong contender, because he already stated that they are by picking it as a top 5. It’s backhanded belittling.

    Yes, other contest sites have flaws as well, but it doesn’t mean the readers should overlook reviews that seem unfair and unprofessional IMO.

  7. mightymattp,

    Jared said pretty much what I was going to say (thanks jared.) This is an opinion and news blog so I think people expect to read my opinions here. But its very important to note that I personally did not get a call from Doritos which means my own ad did not make the finals. So I am not competing against sling baby and I have nothing to gain or lose if they do well in the contest.

    As for other reviews, 95% of the time, the filmmakers who made an ad ask me to share my public opinion. And a lot of those people flat out asked me not to pull any punches. As much as I’d like to think that a team from fritolay spends hours a day combing through the comment section of my website looking for my opinions on certain ads, I know that ain’t happening. So why should I censor myself? It is wrong to rip off other people’s ideas. If I see a rip off I’m not just going to ignore it. Sling baby copied the “formula” that was developed over the years by past CTSB finalists. The writers just made it about kids instead of pets. I’m sure the writer would freely admit that they were trying to create exactly the kind of plot that had worked well in the past.

    Finally, keep in mind that I made my comments in the comment section, not in the actual post. I’d say only about 10% of the people who read this site check out the comment section.

  8. mightymattp,

    Your new comment popped up as soon as I hit submit on my reply.

    To answer your new comment, I have to ask, did you read what I said in this article? I’m not trying to be sarcastic….it’s just that in the article I explained that my 5 predictions were not my personal favorites. They are the 5 ads that I think have a chance of being picked by Doritos this year. Dorttos makes one or two bad choices every year and I expect they’ll make one or two bad choices this year. The problem is that Doritos will always pick a professionally made, amazing-looking but kind of unoriginal ad over a hilarious but not professional looking ad. And I know that Sling Baby was expensive to produce because I’m a filmmaker. I know a professional production when I see one. I bet it probably cost $4,000.

    In 2010, a doritos entry named Underdog made the finals and won a bonus prize for airing during the super bowl and scoring well on the ad meter:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDqk8i8o6YQ

    The next year, a different filmmaker totally copied the formula of underdog and shot an ad named Pug attack. But the director decided to up the cuteness factor by using a pug. He wound up making the finals and Pug attack tied for the #1 spot on the USA today ad meter.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpjaOUjUPUc

    So this year, the makers of Sling Baby took that same formula and replaced the pug with a baby. Heck….I bet that someone who reads this will try and copy the forumla again next year with a box of kittens or a baby pug or something.

  9. Why limit yourself to videos in contests that you also enter? Why not accuse all professional advertisers and filmmakers for stealing and copying ideas. Can’t similarities be found in all ads on TV? In all movies, in all songs, etc.

    My point is, I often see you calling out other filmmakers for stealing ideas, even if it’s commonly used advertising elements, memes, stories, formulas, trends, whatever, that are found in all advertisements to varying degree, in UG contests without due diligence of validation or journalistic integrity. It’s goes beyond critique or review. I’ve read lots of movie reviews, not one pro critic ever accuses a filmmaker of stealing a formula, even if it’s “boy meets girl” so I don’t feel “underdog/baby gets Doritos” should be any different.

    I see it as poor form (not to mention a conflict of interest) for someone who has a strong interest in winning the same contests (whether it be this year or the next) that you blog about and who also accepts advertising money from companies who organize the contests. If someone pays for advertisement on your site, I’m sure they check in from time to time to check the content.

    That is all.

  10. mightymatttp,

    The reason I don’t critique professional ad makers is simple…the name of this blog is videocontestnews.com. I literally post news about video contests. There are already tons of sites that (savagely) critique professionally made commercials. And I focus on contests I’m in because those are the contests I’m familiar with. But when it’s not Crash the Super Bowl season I do tons of articles about contests I’m not it.

    The reason I call people out when I think they’ve ripped off an idea is because video contests filmmakers aren’t usually pros. Pros know the line between “inspiration” and “theft.” So I think it’s important for the people who read this site to be aware that people can tell when contest filmmakers cross the line.

    There is one more thing I want to mention. I’m being kind of hard on “Sling Baby” because it was directed by a filmmaker that has directed TWO previous Crash the Super Bowl finalist ads. He made the finals last year and the year before. So that filmmaker actually knows the guys who invented the “jerk tease a helpless animal with doritos but the helpless creature turns out to be smarter that the jerk and the jerk gets punished” formula. So there can’t be any doubt that they guy knew he was copying a successful formula. And who cares what I think….it might actually be a smart move on his part. Doritos has picked ads that use that formula 2 years in a row.

    I think we should just table this discussion until tomorrow when we actually know the results.

    Oh, one more thing….Doritos has NEVER paid to run ads on this site. So they are not a sponsor. And I don’t think I have ever actually entered a video contest that ran ads here.

  11. Beardy,

    You know I love the site man, and I love all the Crash coverage, but there is a HUGE difference between calling something a “rip-off” and using a “formula”. In the case of Crash the Superbowl, identifying the formula and using it to create your ad is smart. I see very little resemblance with Sling Baby and PUG, other than a bully teasing an innocent.

  12. The results have been posted and it’s a little shocking. Still wondering how Dorito Triangle and Imaginary Friend didn’t make it. Can’t wait to hear your thoughts.

    Thanks for the feedback on my entry too.

  13. Seriously David Paul – “The Beginning” submission? Genius? Not even close. LAME, LAME, LAME. I would’ve used larger font on those “lames” if it was an option here.
    IN REGARDS TO THE FINALISTS – Congrats to all of you if you’re following this feed. Enjoy the Superbowl and all the accolades. “Man’s Best Friend” gets my first vote.

  14. I’m very disappointed in the 5 chosen this year, I seen many better than these I would love to see the judging process in this. I do know now from what was chosen that you need to either have a dog in your commercial or act like a deranged animal pretty much. Where is the variety and the originality. 3 are dog spots, 1 is a guy acting like a retarded bird. Very lame I’m pretty sure there won’t be really high one on the ad tracker this year.

  15. One of the other things that might be worth mentioning here is that it appeared they had some kind of technical glitch with the submission uploading process this year. If you read the forum, you see posts from many participants who complained that though they entered on time and received a confirmation, they didn’t see their spot in the gallery. Sometimes for weeks. (Even though the rules state that they will be posted within 48 hours.)

    I myself entered before the deadline and then waited almost a month to see it posted. I sent email after email to their “moderator” only to be told – finally – that there was a problem uploading my video and would I please resend – which I did. Just out of curiosity, I placed the equivalent of a tiny “watermark” on this second upload – only to see that they ended up posting the original file anyway. What’s up with that?

    With so many contestants complaining that their emails were not being answered, you kind of wonder what the problem was and why they seemed so reticent to respond. And – more importantly – was that an indication of anything that might effect the judges viewing process in any manner?

Comments are closed.