On this year’s Super Bowl, there is one commercial – yes, only one – that’s effective.

One report had 81 commercials running as part of this year’s Super Bowl; another had 65. I am pretty sure I watched (nearly) all of them before reporting to my I-hate-football wife Roberta: 

“There was one pretty clever ad that had Steve Buscemi starring as the manager of a bowling alley, with all kinds of athletes appearing in it too: Peyton Manning, Jimmy Butler, Alex Morgan, Serena Williams, maybe a couple of others. Buscemi was great, perfectly cast, and the spot was pretty riveting, but you know what, I can’t for the life of me remember who the advertiser is.”

More bad advertising.

I rewatched all the spots, looking for something, anything, that works. My second viewing revealed Michelob Ultra owns Buscemi’s “Superior Bowl” commercial . I also see an ad  for Budweiser, called “The Clydesdale’s Journey,” that attempts to update two previous Super Bowl spots, “Puppy Love ” and “Lost Dog ,” this time starring an older Clydesdale and an adult dog. 

I wrote about “Lost Dog” and “Puppy Love” on page 187 of The Art of Client Service,  acknowledging each as,

”an amazing piece of storytelling, backed by terrific acting, great direction, beautiful cinematography, and perfectly chosen music, all in support of a lovable Labrador puppy who pulls you into the narrative,” but I go on to admit, “I love the stories, don’t understand the advertising…”

Apparently I am not the only one who doesn’t get it: if you are a reader of Advertising Age, you already know A-B InBev’s then U.S. Vice President of Marketing, Jorn Socquet, said the two commercials, “have zero impact on beer sales. Those ads I wouldn’t air again because they don’t sell beer.”

There, you have it:  they don’t sell beer. At least one other person understands what advertising should be doing: selling. 

Please don’t tell me the Super Bowl is different, that the rules don’t apply. You’ve spent six-plus million dollars on media, millions more on production, A-list talent, and agency fees, and all you want is awareness? More clicks? A higher ranking on social media?

Advertising has one job to do: sell stuff. Don’t believe me? Ask Jorn Socquet . Ask David Ogilvy . Ask your clients.

This year’s Budweiser ad was directed by Chloe Zhao , who won a 2020 Oscar for the movie Nomadland . Big-time director, big budget, big horse. It should work, right?

“The Clydesdale’s Journey” has none of “Puppy Love” or “Lost Dog’s” charm, and all of its ineffectiveness, an even bigger failure than its predecessors, prompting me to think Zhao somehow missed the memo from Jorn Socquet. Zhao was making a movie scene; she apparently has no clue on how to make a commercial.

One good ad.

Of all the mind-numbing spots I watched and rewatched, only one is worthy of the viewer’s attention: Verizon’s “Cable Guy ,” starring the actor Jim Carrey , reprising his 1996 movie  role by the same name.

Carrey is (sort of) a star, so check that box. (Can you do a spot without a celebrity?) He brings his customary comedic, kinetic energy to the screen. 

But what makes the spot work is Carrey’s skill – or better said, the copywriter’s skill – in weaving the benefits Verizon’s 5G Ultra Wide-band internet service into the story, greatly aided by Geraldine Viswanathan , an extraordinarily well-cast actor – gender perfect, age appropriate, ethnically ambiguous – who subscribes to the service.

In a response to Carrey’s many objections, Viswanathan calmly, methodically proclaims the service’s many advantages (it doesn’t matter if cable is comparable; if you claim it, you own it): it’s wireless, there’s no contract, no hidden fees, works both at home and for business, has good reception, with plug-and-play set-up or the option to have Verizon do the installation.

The spot is star-led, well-acted, and amusingly droll. It features all the benefits of Verizon 5G, by implication trashing traditional cable.

Will we (ever) see more good ads on the Super Bowl?

The problem with nearly all the Super Bowl advertising: too much story – much of it confusing, dismissible, or both – not enough selling.  Verizon’s spot is the exception: it consolidates an entertaining, funny, you’ve-got-my-attention story with a here-is-what-you need-to-know sales effort, combined in perfectly balanced proportion. It’s effective. It works.

It would be great if we could see more advertising like this on the Super Bowl, but sadly, we won’t. Instead, we’ll likely endure more first-rank directors and big-time stars making bad movies instead of good commercials.