Why? I asked it then and I ask it again now... why?

Back in Oct. 2004 I wrote an editorial questioning the potential of imperceptibly CG people being created for films and commercials. I said I was freaked out by the potential loss of humanity with faux humans.

Now I know why. His name is Orville Redenbacher and he debuted in a commercial called "Digital Music" during the Golden Globes broadcast in January. No disrespect to the long-deceased eponymous popcorn spokesperson, but his reincarnation is more like a bad acid flashback than an endearing renewal of a beloved icon.

In a way you can understand how this happened. Digital Domain has been working on this über-real CG human technology for years and has no doubt been keen to give it a test run. And you have to admit, in terms of progress it's impressive, even if it still misses the mark (that mouth, those eyes!) On the flipside, Crispin Porter + Bogusky love to stir up controversy and conversation for its clients. ECD Alex Bogusky has been quoted as saying, "What happens is [the ads] are very controversial, then they become accepted, and then they take their place wherever it is they belong," before adding "there's a lot of power in being the first to do it."

But thus far the reaction of Internet chatterers (who have so cleverly dubbed him Deadenbacher) has been swift and conclusive: he's just creepy.

Even worse than reviving the dead for the express purpose of hawking popcorn is the spot's appalling attempt to make hip the squarest of public figures. Pairing Orville with an iPod looks about as natural and believable as the 'true love' shared by TomKat. In its

attempts to make him relevant, this spot simply proves there's no substitute for the real thing.

Please tell me the dearth of new ideas is not so deep and pervasive that the solution to a troubling marketing problem is to resurrect the long-since passed. If so, should we fear what's to come from the likes of Wendy's and KFC, whose ubiquitous pitch patriarchs have also perished?

And if it's just a stunt, which it surely is, then I revisit the assertion I made in 2004: "Just because you can doesn't mean you should." This is why.

Cheers,
Rae Ann Fera
Editor