Gory pseudo accident ads

[Jantar]

A comment by Rainbow Wizard in another thread promted the ide for this one.

How many of you have noticed how rediculous the accident ads from the LTSA really are. The inconsistancies that I have picked out are:

The one where a guy driving home from the pub suddenly sees a motorbike coming towards him. He brakes suddenly and looks in his rear vision mirror. No bike, only the white lines going directly away from him. When he arrives home his wife asks if he saw Matt, who apparently was riding a bike. It turns out that Matt was killed and of course our driver blames himself. However look at the white lines in his rear view mirrior, then look at the car's skid mark going ACROSS the road. There is no way that the driver in the ad could have made that skid mark yet still have seen white lines in his mirror.

[Jantar]

Then take the ad where a guy says to his wife "we'll be there in 10 minutes" They are in a red car. At the accident scene when she is being loaded into the helicopter he says "don't worry, we'll be there in 10 minutes" but the car has changed colour to a bluish grey.

[Will]

Can't say that I have looked at those ads close enough to notice.

I noticed the intersection accident involving the bike and could see it as a put up because any biker would not have ridden into such a scene or would have been able to ride out of it. The guy was ditching his bike before anything got near enough to knock him off.
And as we all know, that's the last thing you do. Instead, suck that bike right up your a.... and use what ever means (accelerator, brakes, counter steering etc) to get you out of there.
Then if all else fails, aim for the driver because it is gonna hurt and you might as well inflict pain on the culprit.

[Jantar]

Or consider the ad where two girls in a car brake suddenly at an intersection yet still hit the car in front. One of the girls is catapulted through the winscreen and lands on the bonnet of another car two car lengths in front.

It takes her 4 seconds from impact to land on the bonnet, that gives her a forward velocity after impact of 2.5 m/s and a vertical velocity of 20 m/s. The trajevtory angle of incidence would be 78 degrees, therefore the velocity of the car imediately prior to commencing braking would be sqrt(20^2 + 2.5^2)/cos 78. This gives a speed at commencement of braking of 168 m/s or 604 km/h.

This ad would have belivable if sh had have landed 40 m or more away from the impact, or if the time to landing had only been 1 second. But the LTSA must think we are all thick or something.

[SPman]

This ad would have belivable if she had have landed 40 m or more away from the impact, or if the time to landing had only been 1 second. But the LTSA must think we are all thick or something.

They do!
Must be going for maximum impact!

[Waylander]

Dude..... your getting way to serious about this, its just a silly ad that isnt gonna change anything really.
(just like that smilie)

[Jantar]

Dude..... your getting way to serious about this,

Oh, I didn't mean to sound too serious, Its just that get a laugh out of how rediculous these ads are. I actually enjoy watching each new one now to find the stupid errors they make.

[Waylander]

Oh, I didn't mean to sound too serious, Its just that get a laugh out of how rediculous these ads are. I actually enjoy watching each new one now to find the stupid errors they make.

Was takin the piss mate, i get a laugh out of them to. You dont see stuff like that in the states so its prety funny to watch.

[Blakamin]

. This gives a speed at commencement of braking of 168 m/s or 604 km/h.

where can I buy one of them cages????? :spudwhat:

[Skunk]

...but the car has changed colour to a bluish grey.

And model. And the car he's hit is damaged on the right and his damage is on the left. Yep, both travelling in the same direction... I think John Woo worked on the physics of that one. :spudwhat:

[Mongoose]

It takes her 4 seconds from impact to land on the bonnet, that gives her a forward velocity after impact of 2.5 m/s and a vertical velocity of 20 m/s. The trajevtory angle of incidence would be 78 degrees, therefore the velocity of the car imediately prior to commencing braking would be sqrt(20^2 + 2.5^2)/cos 78. This gives a speed at commencement of braking of 168 m/s or 604 km/h.

This ad would have belivable if sh had have landed 40 m or more away from the impact, or if the time to landing had only been 1 second. But the LTSA must think we are all thick or something.

Some people just have way to much time on their hands, or are wired up a wee tad different to most. Who would be bothered working out all that math to come to that conclusion?
Guess that ad did its job though, made people think, even if it was not what the ad set out to make you think of.

[onearmedbandit]

I like the ad where the guy is doing a commercial for house paint. You know the one, he's on a ladder talking to a camera about company x's new paint. He reaches too far to get that last bit of paint on, then falls off the ladder. I mean, what are the director, film crew, boom operators, agent all doing after he falls? Just standing there watching??

I realise it doesn't change the point of the ad, just the continuity is fucked up. Its the same with the mother talking about a new muslei bar, trips over the tiny little toy and smashes through the glass table. Once again, the crew who must be filming her making the ad about said muslei bar just stand there. Fire 'em all, they're fucking idiots!

[Waylander]

I like the ad where the guy is doing a commercial for house paint. You know the one, he's on a ladder talking to a camera about company x's new paint. He reaches too far to get that last bit of paint on, then falls off the ladder. I mean, what are the director, film crew, boom operators, agent all doing after he falls? Just standing there watching??

I realise it doesn't change the point of the ad, just the continuity is fucked up. Its the same with the mother talking about a new muslei bar, trips over the tiny little toy and smashes through the glass table. Once again, the crew who must be filming her making the ad about said muslei bar just stand there. Fire 'em all, they're fucking idiots!

I hope your kidding, you do know that those are Stunt men and women doing that to advertise for how dangerous regular housework can be, or something about insurance.

[Jamezo]

I hope your kidding, you do know that those are Stunt men and women doing that to advertise for how dangerous regular housework can be, or something about insurance.

you are somewhat mistaken, he was not referring to the actions or lack thereof of the actual film crew filming the ACC ads, just the observation that if it were a real commercial, as it aims to appear as, the film crew would undoubtedly not just stand behind the camera like stunned mullets.

edit: PS. the ladder dude cracks me up no end...

[Waylander]

you are somewhat mistaken, he was not referring to the actions or lack thereof of the actual film crew filming the ACC ads, just the observation that if it were a real commercial, as it aims to appear as, the film crew would undoubtedly not just stand behind the camera like stunned mullets.

well damn dont i feel silly now.......