FormFiftyFive™

Inspiration / Pepsi Design Strategy

Liked that? Try these:

What do you think?

Greig
10th Feb 2009
11:51 am

1. Wow thats an absolutely amazing amount of guff. No amount of elliptical oscillations and comparisons to the mona lisa are going to make me think he Pepsi Re-brand was a good idea. Back to the 80\’s Pepsi please, or at least the elliptical drawing board.


karl
10th Feb 2009
12:10 pm

2. “BREATHTAKING”

   yep. but for all the wrong reasons. I wonder how much the re-brand cost?


Sandro
10th Feb 2009
1:15 pm

3. breathtaking.

   NOT.

   so what if it has mathemathical reasons, golden ratio what so ever. this is dull.
   no one knows it has genuine mathematical “beauty”.

   i think that subject was missed by a million.


MatthewNotMatt
10th Feb 2009
1:48 pm

4. “The Brand Identity is Dimensionalized through Motion”

   What a load of ****!


Emil
10th Feb 2009
2:16 pm

5. someone’s spent too long in an academic environment!

   The art of self deception seems to be directly associated with the amount of self importance given.


Ugo
10th Feb 2009
2:18 pm

6. Well this IS a serious amount of “we did that and now lets find a reason for it”. I mean i never had to participate in a rebrand like that big. But i’m sure it doesn’t require that amount of bull.
   A designer i know was asked to rebrand the lotery agency’s logo here. This guy, after much work and consultations, decided the logo was just fine and simply needed some ajustments – not a rebrand -in order to work better.
   So he did explain and convinced the officials that this was the best way to go.
   Now thats professionnalism, not a famewhore designer’s dream of putting it’s mark on a huge brand.

   my 2 cents.


Anthony James Bruno
10th Feb 2009
2:25 pm

7. Its breathtaking alright, I laughed so hard I almost died.


Glenn
10th Feb 2009
2:29 pm

8. God, that is ridiculous! Talk about post-rationalisation!? Dynamic Forces, Energy Fields, Globe Dynamics, “One identity, Multiple Emotions”??? And what the hell is it with the Attraction Theory? Are they seriously using the Relativity of Space and Time to explain peoples shopping habits?


Cookie
10th Feb 2009
2:43 pm

9. It\’s just nonsense. No wonder designers are thought of as \’tossers\’ in some quarters. Who can blame them if this is the kind of thing people get to see? This, like the whole London 2012 debate, will no doubt throw up how much Pepsi paid to have this \’re-brand\’ done, and cause the non-creative population to have a good whinge. Yet another example of bad work dragging the name of design and branding through the mud.


Jack
10th Feb 2009
3:12 pm

10. B.O.S. This is so obviously a wind-up. It’s so over the top and contrived that, I refuse to believe it’s a real piece of rationalisation. Whoever has created it has, seemingly, used a comical crowbar to fit in as much ridiculous content as possible.

    Hoax.


Gui Seiz
10th Feb 2009
3:23 pm

11. hahahaaha that is so full of WIN!

    wind up for sure.. but full full of win!


Glenn
10th Feb 2009
5:49 pm

12. I hope you guys are right! It’s got to be a hoax!!!


Matt
10th Feb 2009
6:10 pm

13. I think I’m the only person that buys this – it may well be a hoax (it certainly looks like it), but one of the most annoying things for me as a designer is when I talk to other designers and they can\’t even begin to articulate why they did something, or why something works when they randomly happen upon a lucky coincidence. Having a strong visual sense and random intuition are two very different things.

    Surely a bit of time spent learning colour theory, learning about spacial conventions in architecture and compositional visual effectiveness in art is the same as learning chords and scales in music? You would never just randomly arrange your fingers on a keyboard and keep pressing until you found something aurally pleasing, and yet thats how many designers I’ve met approach a blank page…

    Yours Sincerely
    The Devil’s Advocate


Chris
10th Feb 2009
6:34 pm

14. That’s all well and good as long as the final piece of design is actually grounded in some form of reality.


John
10th Feb 2009
6:40 pm

15. Sometimes you get too close to the details and forget to step back and look at the big picture…in this case the big picture turned out to be a bunch of awkward smiles and a concept that most won’t catch. Use your gut and your eye, not your ruler.


Matt
10th Feb 2009
7:53 pm

16. True Chris – very true.


MatthewNotMatt
10th Feb 2009
7:57 pm

17. I think I’d believe this was a wind up if the actual logo redesign wasn’t so horrible. and that is speaking from an avid, loyal Pepsi drinker not just as a designer.


Jason
10th Feb 2009
10:21 pm

18. This cannot possibly be real. Its so painful.


martin
10th Feb 2009
10:27 pm

19. a worrying trend in design land
    overpaid bullshit masquerading as a well
    considered idea, the makers should be pitied
    the client should be fired, the brand
    will no doubt survive but not thanks to
    this guff…


Iain
10th Feb 2009
10:56 pm

20. \"post-rationalisation\" was my mantra at art school

    It\’s like some UK advert a few years ago when the two marketing twats described something as \"Imagineer\". Showing the new brand a few weeks ago to friends who are not into design at all they all thought it was \"utter shite\". You wonder how this stuff gets out the studio, do they not flash it to the window cleaner, Sally in the canteen and ask them what they think at any point in its development.


martin
11th Feb 2009
12:58 am

21. actually if it is a hoax
    i find the makers even sadder than
    if it is genuine…


razifohnas
11th Feb 2009
5:06 am

22. The rational seems logical, but I sense very little emotion. The direction seemed like inhumane. Logically engineered usually lose hap tic tactile sense. Also, to be more critical about this, is there any instigation on senses other than the measure of visual beauty?

    Just a question.


razifohnas
11th Feb 2009
9:10 am

23. Oh wait. Its full of bull crap.


Glenn
11th Feb 2009
9:42 am

24. 


S
11th Feb 2009
10:16 am

25. In todays metro…


albin
11th Feb 2009
11:41 am

26. Wow…that’s some emotional shit! haha!
    Why? Whyyyyyyyyy?

    It’s so easy to do it the right way…


Nikolay
11th Feb 2009
12:50 pm

27. http://www.arnellgroup.com/


Ed Watt
11th Feb 2009
3:45 pm

28. It’s got to be a wind up. Good publicity stunt possibly. They’ve got us all talking about it and maybe that’s the point? Really hilarious though, especially the ‘gravitational pull’ section!!


Rory
11th Feb 2009
4:02 pm

29. It reminds me of the ‘artists’ who sell paintings for millions that look average at best but the cost is justified by the fact the artist uses a prosthetic horse penis to ejaculate paint from his elbow.


David Marsh
12th Feb 2009
12:52 am

30. That has got to be a spoof, no doubt about it


freddesign
12th Feb 2009
10:13 am

31. just seems like a load of justification to be honest which is a sad area of design. Does exhist tho.


jovino
17th Mar 2009
10:17 pm

32. Complete bullshit.

    The bottom line is: it’s still just liquified candy.

    But, the ad agency has to justify their fees somehow.

    Glen’s comment nails it best though: http://www.formfiftyfive.com/?p=4039#comment-18069

Name (required)

Email (will not be published) (required)

Your website