ever since its unveiling last week, the official logo for the 2012 London Olympics has been the subject of much ridicule, heaps of scorn and lots of bemused head-shaking. I haven't seen or heard a single positive thing about it, and I can't say I'm shocked, considering how laughingly bad it looks. Supposedly representing the youthful spirit of the Games, the logo was designed by branding agency Wolff Olins for a reported £400,000, which is fast looking like the biggest waste of money since Brewster was given all those millions. The thing is so ugly, even Klaxons fans wouldn't approve. And they wear Wake Me Up Before You Go Go-style tee-shirts, so that's saying something.
To add to the ridiculousness it was reported late last week that the video ad for the Olympics which was posted on the official website contained scenes that had caused seizures for several people suffering from epilepsy. Not a great way to pull back opinion in your favor, that's for sure.
And since the Brits are generally a cheeky bunch and are quite good are poking fun at themselves (the source of many 'We're not in Kansas anymore' moments for me since moving), the email forwards have been plentiful on the matter, with people everywhere trying their best to make fun of the ill-fated design. Personnally I liked this one:
The furore has reached such proportions that's there now a backlash to the backlash, consisting mostly in newspaper columnists using the argument "well, it's not that bad", without sounding very convinced themselves. While I think this whole matter isn't really that serious to begin with, I just hope that the world will not evolve to the point where in 2012 this logo is considered good taste. The 80s happened once, and humanity managed to get past it, so let's not revisit it too much, shall we?
And in another piece of news about dubious use of money, artist Damien Hirst has created a £50 million artefact: a diamond-encrusted skull. Apparently it's supposed to bring joy to the world or something. I really don't have anything to add to that.
And since the Brits are generally a cheeky bunch and are quite good are poking fun at themselves (the source of many 'We're not in Kansas anymore' moments for me since moving), the email forwards have been plentiful on the matter, with people everywhere trying their best to make fun of the ill-fated design. Personnally I liked this one:
The furore has reached such proportions that's there now a backlash to the backlash, consisting mostly in newspaper columnists using the argument "well, it's not that bad", without sounding very convinced themselves. While I think this whole matter isn't really that serious to begin with, I just hope that the world will not evolve to the point where in 2012 this logo is considered good taste. The 80s happened once, and humanity managed to get past it, so let's not revisit it too much, shall we?And in another piece of news about dubious use of money, artist Damien Hirst has created a £50 million artefact: a diamond-encrusted skull. Apparently it's supposed to bring joy to the world or something. I really don't have anything to add to that.
No comments:
Post a Comment