New Sony Bravia Ad


Like the “Balls” ad, the new Sony Bravia ad is showing up everywhere. I thought about it posting it last night when I saw it for the first time, but honestlyâ€â€?and I know this isn’t going to make me popularâ€â€?I’m really not that into it. I mean, I like the concept, but the execution leaves me underwhelmed. I think if I was actually there while they were doing this thing, it would have been amazing. But it loses something in video.

About the author

Justin Cone

Together with Carlos El Asmar, Justin co-founded Motionographer, F5 and The Motion Awards. He currently lives in Austin, Texas with is wife, son and fluffball of a dog. Before taking on Motionographer full-time, Justin worked in various capacities at Psyop, NBC-Universal, Apple, Adobe and SCAD.



wow, deinitely impressive…Although I feel like this was only half as impactful as the first one, mainly because it’s the same idea (color eye candy). I guess the wow factor was there, but the mental impact (like “Audi Emotions”) was missing…


Nice idea, I really like the interior shots and the rain at the end, but the Youtube clip a couple of months ago gave it all away really. And the clown is just crap.


Beautiful! But whats with the clown, haha!


Yeah. I totally get you, Justin. there’s something missing there. Not getting the emotional impact. So blase compared to the first coloured-balls ad.


I would have said the same at first, but now looking at it… I like it a lot!
I think they are two different feeling. One more nostalgique and one more crazy, like the clown set it all up! The songs makes the commercial! Try to look at them with no sound! They want the hype, we’re giving it!


really? come on. you gotta be kidding me right? this piece is amazing. not only the concept and execution. to even do this you need a huge crew of people and money and a lot of time. which they had. which I don’t think you know how much work really goes into something like this. this piece is dope and excellent.


Yeah, it took lots of work, I don’t think that’s exactly the issue.

For me, the best parts were the rain at the end and the interior shots (agreeing with Barney). Those shots really let the color fill the screen, be rich and saturated. Those shots were about the color.

The exterior shots, while very impressive, felt like they were more about the execution than about the colors. The color explosions were great – as color explosions. But within seconds the color was dissipating. That’s probably very accurate, in terms of physics and I’m sure a lot of hours went into making the color bursts dissipate realistically – but the spot’s not about realism. It’s about color.

That’s why parts of it let me down and why those couple shots I mentioned earlier really worked for me.

Props to everyone involved though.


“to even do this you need a huge crew of people and money and a lot of time.”

You see, that’s exactly where I think this spot went wrong. The making-of featurette makes a big deal about all the paint they used, all the time, the money, the people. The filmmakers talk about the grand scale of thing.

But bigger is not always better. While this was an amazing technical feat, there’s almost ZERO emotional impact for me personally. I know that’s a subjective thing, but some ads have more potential for emotional impact than others. This one, I think, ranks low on that scale.

I think several well-lit shots of slow-motion paint explosions with less cheesy music would have been more impactful than this massive expenditure of time and money.


I can’t believe you thought this was mediocre, but you thought that DK “Dexter” title sequence was badass?


“I can’t believe you thought this was mediocre, but you thought that DK “Dexterâ€Â? title sequence was badass?”

This is what I get for slumming it in the comments. ;-)


I agree with justin. Idea would be great if it was better directed.

The clown is stupid.


“to even do this you need a huge crew of people and money and a lot of time. which they had. which I don’t think you know how much work really goes into something like this. this piece is dope and excellent.”

This is solely your opinion, and not a fact. Sure there was a huge budget involved, but that doesn’t mean the concept and execution were great.

And I don’t think it’s really appropriate for you to go around saying “I don’t think you know…”. Why trivialize the experience of someone who visits this site?

I also didn’t feel much interest in this ad because it didn’t communicate very strongly to me. Again, that’s just my opinion.

the notorious E.G.G

I think it’s brilliant. Superior to the balls in my opinion.


you are right it is my opinion. but if you don’t have some comedic value in judging a clown or this has to have an over the top idea… which some projects don’t have ideas… just visual love. I think this one DOES fall under great filming, execution, and color. It does get that point across to the average person around the world. To the design and motion graphics community which take up what, maybe less than 5% of the world. I don’t think they were aiming for a huge concept. unless your IQ is over the top and can’t laugh that a clown is in there. Art is not art unless people hate it or love it. just a thought and rant. sorry. haha.


I like the the concept of color splashing everywhere, but I wish there could’ve been some really tight shots of some living things getting coated with color. Even though there was a write up about how much paint, time, people etc were used, this shot seems like it could’ve been done with a some fluid special effects. It would be great to see that clown get doused.


“to even do this you need a huge crew of people and money and a lot of time.�

– What the heck does having a lot of people any money have to do with design?


Yawn. Well not really yawn, I’m just trying to incite a riot. It’s ok, but the making of was a nice touch. I though’t it was all 3D with some amazing compositing. There is something to be said about using on set practical photography in these 3D days that we live in. 6/10 if not for the final colour gradient blow up.


I definately think the piece was well thought out. My first thoughts of course driven by the music. Who today uses a classical overture opera piece like Rossini’s? It also makes it not just splashy but theorically just like the ochestra was playing.


For me, the only bits that worked were the bits that were uncalculated, the bouncing balls felt completely organic and natural, I think the key word here is man made…the paint just feels too orchestrated and to linear, I would have prefered macro shots of bugs and insects and flowers being covered in coloured paint, I understand the near monochromatic look and feel of the chosen suburbia, but i don’t agree with it….cloudy day? brown dull buildings? with man made synchronised paint? this would have worked well as an advert for video/audio composting software…illustrating the softwares’ precision over sound and video?


Renascent thanks for the youtube example. It still holds for me – I guess I’m not too fixated on the in-organisim of the paint balls. It is not another empty commercial however- though it lacks an emotional connection, it depicts vigor.


Killed by bad editing. This entire spot hinges on the gag of something drab and grey getting covered in colour, but on a ridicolously huge scale. So what does the editor do? Give the entire gag away IN THE FIRST SHOT.

The rest of the first half has no real impact because the shots are too wide and the coloured explosions get lost. The second half is stunningly beautiful, but at this point you’ve already seen the gag and aren’t really all that surprised. Given the amount of time, energy and cash that this spot must have consumed, it’s a real shame to see it get dulled by something so simple (and easily fixable).


This is excellent work. But a shot of a bunch council trash fleeing from their exploding housing estate would have been funnier than the clown.


Yep — a lot of work, but bad editing … or bad storytelling. I agree with Alex in that they give away the gag in the first shot, and the shots are too wide in the first half. They make the paint look small and ineffectual, to me, at least.

Well, maybe they didn’t have enough fab medium wide shots to fill it out, so they had to use all those wide shots.


Stupidity prevails once again!!!!!

DK title sequences were brilliant and this is low in the ranks??

i think its becoming abvious that this is just garbage talk.

The paint spot has double the concept of the balls.

OK lets be honest and grown up for a minute….

balls falling down the street. zero concept, make them colourful, and now you have concept (to show good colour TV)

Now everyone has seen demolition building shit, but instead use paint! Thats brilliant.

Secondly when you think PAINT, what do you think? COLOUR!!!

ohhhhh dhaaaaaa urrrggg i get it now, colour and paint and beuilding blowing up paint instead of dust a rubble…. get it?? get it??

somtimes i am surprised at how low some people’s mentality is when it comes to this sort of thing jeeeez.


There are definatly some good moments on this footage, the idea is great but i do agree that it isnt as impactful as the bouncy balls piece. I really like it when the music starts playing fast and the building scene but before that its just ok (and that blue pain explosion that comes from nowhere looks like a really bad composite). But overal it does feel a bit unfinished, either that or it needs to be choped off, 70 seconds is alot of time.


It communicates “color” quite well, its visually rich and exciting, shows me
something about color in a new and unexpected way, and no, you couldnt do this on a computer.


The new Bravia spot communicates color but not as something visually rich, exciting or vibrant. To the American eye, the location looks like a housing project, a failed architectural form that has come to signify urban oppression and blight. In this light, the spot might explicitly portrays color as a vibrant spectrum but the implicit racial, class and economic messages inherent in the location overpower any intended (and innocuous) meaning.

So as a successful piece of branded communication for Sony televisions, the spot fails. Strip away the logos and maybe you have an art video that could barely stand up to performance art of the 1980s (see anything by Roman Signer or any of Bruce Nauman’s clown videos).

But kudos to Glaser and company for getting paid. I’m sure they have a clean director’s cut.


jeez, Tha_Don put a sock in it (or paint…) everyobody is entitled to their own opinion (yes even you) but no need to attack the people that post here… be glad that they do and that this websites even exists for you to whine on for every now post, so excuse them for having an opinion…

anyways, it may appear to have twice the concept, it lacks twice the feeling of the other spot imo.

in the end the concept IS color so they both stand their ground. the balls one remains a classic, the paint will dry ;)


Hi all,
I agree with Justin about the fact that this spot does not have the impact of the balls. It does not have the finesse and emotional movement the balls had. Maybe more highspeed photography would have helped that. I think though, that paint is not as simple of a thing the balls were. A bouncing ball is everywere around, and we all have personal feelings about these little bouncing balls. We all played with those when we were kids. The editing in the balls spot also was more spacious and flowing. It soes not mean the spot is not Beautiful nor badly executed. It is a great amount of work and it was for sure a great deal of timing on location (and San Fran was a much nicer location)
Just my 2 cents
Great site Justin, keep up the great work.


A colourful clown outfit would be better…well, AT LEAST…


renascent… oh-oh, “lets be glad we have a site”… “lets go and hug trees”, “lets all join hands and play ring around the roses”…..
why dont we talk about the spot being discussed yea? got nothing to do today?
anyway, i’ll ignor negative nancy over there and get back to the spot.

warrenpfitz brings up i must say a solid arguement, i have to agree with him. There was something in that spot that made me wonder, and warrenpfitz put his finger on it.
shot against tall nice white clean walls or something would have been far more impressive, and would have shown off the colors more vividly


With the music and the clown it reminds me of V is for Vendetta when he sets off all the fireworks.

Rizon Parein

Same concept but then
_At Night
_Fluo paint (The paint giving light to its surroundings)

I think that would have been more dramatic, effective, emphasising more the idea of “Colour Like no other”…

While thinking about it, gonna give that a try in 3d…fluids as a lightsource…


how far are we from being able to do this fully cg? and therefore 1000 X more spectacular…


1996 on david letterman:


It’s easy to say afterward – so I will : Buildings should be white, lenses should be longer, camera speed should be higher. that’s it.

Comments are closed.