Note: Scroll down if you want to just skip my blabbering and see which 6 entries we recommend Doritos consider for the finals.

Since the passing of the November 9th deadline I’ve tried to watch as many of the entries for this year’s Crash the Superbowl contest as I could. But alas, Beardy is only human and I probably managed to look at only 2,800 or so of the 4,069 submitted videos. That means chances are good that I completely missed some of the most awesome submissions. So, though I’ve said that I planned to announce this website’s predictions for which entries will make it to the final 6, I don’t think that’s really a fair thing to do.

Instead, I’m going to completely ignore some of the highest quality spots that I saw and post 6 entries that I really enjoyed but that I suspect Doritos may overlook. So let’s call this list VideoContestNews.com’s official recommended CTSB entries! Before I get into my humble video recommendations, I’d like to first make one general recommendation to the judges of the Crash the Superbowl contest: Think Small.

While watching all those entries, I saw a lot of very, very well made and expensive spots but with two or three exceptions, none of the high-budget/high concept submissions had much heart. On the other hand, I did see a number of really cool, really creative commercials that seem to have been shot by semi-pros and amateurs using consumer and “prosumer” grade video cameras. But a little googling will tell you that 4 of the 5 finalists last year shot their entries with RED One cameras. Don’t know what that is? It’s a very, very high-end camera that starts at about $17,000. So it’s clear that last year Doritos wanted the slickest commercials that filmmakers outside of the ad industry could make. (If you can get your hands on anything nicer that a RED camera you’re probably already a well paid pro.)

And all of last year’s finalists were stellar. They were slick enough to look like actual TV commercials but they were also funny, subversive and surprising. But after watching almost 3,000 of this year’s entries I just don’t see many that had top notch production values and were also FUNNY and ORIGINAL. Basically this year’s slickest entries just come off as hollow versions of “real” commercials.

So what happened? Two things I think; One, Doritos put up millions of dollars in prize money and then marketed the contest like crazy. So tons of people who never picked up a camera before jumped on the bandwagon. And two, all of last year’s finalists were so F***ing amazing that many pro and semi-pro filmmakers assumed the bar would be way to high and didn’t bother to enter. People like that know the look of the RED camera and they did the math in their head and realized that to be a serious competitor, you’d need to have access to a RED camera (or at least a high end HD camera). So right off the bat you’re already looking at a budget of $1,000 to rent a RED camera for a day. And not just any shmuck can run those. So unless you’ve used one before, throw in another $500 for a D.P. who knows what he’s doing. So that’s $1,500 minimum. And I’ll tell you, it takes a very, very special person to be willing to gamble that much money on a production when they see that 3,000 entries have already been uploaded.

So basically this means that there are two kinds of good videos among this year’s batch of entries. There are cool, funny, inventive videos that were made by non-pros or semi-pros who used consumer and prosumer level gear, and there are ok, but not super funny, big-budget entries that feature pretty graphics, lots of fancy but unnecessary dolly shots and in some cases, established characters actors, B-list celebrities and in one case, a semi-well known indie band.

My recommendation to the CTSB judges is to forget the slick, not-so-funny entries and give a few of the littler guys a shot. The first year that Doritos ran the Crash the Superbowl competition (2006), the winning commercial had a budget of only $12! That’s probably why so many pros jumped in in 2008. (Doritos did something else for the superbowl the year in between) They knew that if they could make a funny spot that also looked like a “real” commercial, they could crush the competition. Well this year I don’t think the pros delivered and so Doritos should do something bold; forget about only picking finalists that look like “real” commercials. Obviously they can’t air a spot with crappy lighting and muffled sound during the superbowl, but they can and should give serious consideration to the “prosumer” level filmmakers that submitted. If they don’t, I don’t think CTSB spots will go on to take all three top spots in the USA Today ad meter.

And making the “Top 3” of the Ad meter is the entire point of this contest. That right there is exactly why Doritos should go with videos that are attention-getting and big on laughs, rather than videos that are super-slick but only mildly amusing. And while the point of the contest is to make the top 3, the MESSAGE of the contest is that if given the chance, creative, regular Joes can beat the Madison Avenue crowd at their own game. Even many of the people in the Ad Meter poll will understand that’s what this contest is about and I suspect they will give extra points to the CTSB finalists IF those finalist videos actually look different that all the other spots that air during the game.

What I’m saying is that Doritos should pick at least a few finalists that are a little ROUGH AROUND THE EDGES. Yes, they might be seen by 100 Million people and yes they will stick out like a sore thumb. And that’s why it’d be great! If you’re watching the game and all of the sudden, some crazy thing that some dude shot in his back yard comes on the TV, you’re going to sit up and take notice. And if that “imperfect” ad makes you laugh, then it has been a success, even if only cost 12 bucks to make. If Doritos wanted to shoot a commercial featuring Flavor Flav they could seal that deal during a single lunch meeting. If they wanted to cast the secretary from Ferris Bueller in a commercial they could make that happen in less than 4 phone calls. And if they wanted their own version of the Dos Equis “Most Interesting Man in the World” commercials they could have a team crank that out in a week. So why should Doritos pick spots that an ad firm on Madison Avenue could slap together without breaking a sweat? If you’re going to create a new and completely different way to get your superbowl commercials, shouldn’t the commercials you get actually seem completely different than everything else that’s going to air during the game?

Anyway, that’s my 2 cents. Finally, here are the 6 entries that I really hope Doritos considers for their 2010 Crash the Superbowl finalists. These are in order with #1 being my favorite:

#6. Don’t Be that Guy by “Moedirty.” Video #2530
This spot really only has one thing going for it; the super-serious guy at the end. But you know what? That guy is PERFECT. If this aired during the Superbowl the next day people in offices all across the country would be saying the hot new catchphrase “You have to leave.”





#5. Want More? by “Shonky.” Video #2081
If this commercial was shot by a major ad company you wouldn’t think about it twice. But knowing that it was just a couple of crazy dudes who made this adds a sweet level of insanity to it.





#4. So Worth It by “tgo0116.” Video #307
This is a Superbowl-style comedy of errors commercial shot for (probably) nothing. But that low-budget, indie look gives it the heart that so many of the slicker entries are lacking. This guy wanted to win so bad he cut a hole in his mother f***ing roof. Hell yeah.





#3. Doritos Make Everything Better by “Keithhopkin.” Video #951
It looks like it was shot for a high school film class but this will keep viewers smiling all the way through. The shot of the dog wincing when the Doritos fall on him might hurt this video’s chances but the dog probably didn’t mind, right?





#2. Battlestations! by “Laserbunny.” Video #4097
This one has actually got some nice effects but it still has a nice indie vibe to it. Despite the CGI they use, the “fractal Dorito” was apparently real. I think this one can make the official Top 6.





#1. Wrong Commercial by “knewacheck.” Video #3742
This commercial is just flat out stupid…and I love it. It’s so weird and goofy and you can tell that it was made for fun. Maybe the “Got Milk” bit at the end will cause a copyright problem big enough to keep it out of the finals but I hope not. The spot’s absurd but it’s absurd in a very smart way. Right off the bat, the characters let the viewer know that what they are seeing is a commercial submitted for a contest. That gives the spot license to be imperfect and look like it was made by three random knuckleheads. But I’m over thinking it. It’s funny and it works, that’s all that should matter.





Now as I said, I also shot an entry for this year’s competition but of course it’d be pretty shady of me to include it in my top 6. So instead I’ll just place a link right here if you want to check it out:

/#/video/1983

Despite all my talk about low-budget spots, I shot my entry on HD and it cost about $1,600. We even through a crane shot in there! Do as Beardy says folks, not as Beardy does. We used a prosumer HD camera though so I consider it to be a “medium-sized” production. Plus it is sorta rough around the edges I think.

So what do you think folks? Are we right or are we crazy? Did we overlook any potential winners? Let us know in the comment box. And because I can’t help myself, check back on Friday to see which two, more slickly-produced videos we predict will make it to the finals and the Superbowl.