Environmental Viral Ad Darkly Spoofs The Lego Movie - Update

[CrazyGirl17]

Having seen and enjoyed the Lego Movie... what the hell?! Way to traumatize people, Greenpeace. Looks like the PETA method is working for you.

And now Lego's not renewing a contract with Shell...well, good for them, but there has to be a better way of convincing them.

Seriously, fuck Greenpeace. And PETA. And all those "environmentalist groups" who use trauma as a way to "convince people".

 

[josh4president]

Oh Lord Greenpeace is never going to shut up about this.

Watch for this exact same tactic to be repeated verbatim ad nauseum infinitum by every advocacy group out there with such blatant ham-handedness you could put a bun around their fists and call them BLTs.

I'm looking at you, PETA.

 

[flying_whimsy]

A bit stronge there GP, but totally agree with you. It's a very insidious relationship lego has with shell. It's like having having a video game about joe camel.

I'm not a fan of greenpeace, but I do agree with them on this one, too. As someone that had some of the lego shell sets when I was little, I actually did have a softer view of them in comparison to other oil companies. "How bad could they be if Lego approved them for sets?" was my reasoning when I was younger. I'm not that naive anymore, and I definitely think it's a bad idea to have a company like shell putting its branding on kids' toys (especially if it was actually a calculated attempt to try and repair the shell name).

As someone that still buys legos, I do wonder what they are going to do with all of those pieces they covered with gunk (I hope greenpeace wasn't stupid enough to use actual oil). If they didn't want to be bothered with cleaning I'd gladly have taken all of those dirty bricks off their hands.

 

[P-89 Scorpion]

Well since Greenpeace doesn't like oil I hope all their supporters and workers refuse to use any health services that rely on oil for power and fuel as well as plastic for the making of medical equipment.

Not to mention the Greenpeace leadership's use of private jets so they don't have to mix with the 'plebeian's'.

 

[TippiestRook]

First they get rid of Lego from Shell next thing you know they'll conquer world!

 

[nima55]

But how can Greenpeace use a mouse and keyboard, when their fists are made of Ham?

 

[webkilla]

But how can Greenpeace use a mouse and keyboard, when their fists are made of Ham.

It's a mystery to us all

 

[Xman490]

And why does Lego need to support Shell? Seems like a weird connection.

Lego products are made from plastic, which has some relation to oil, I guess. Maybe the relation is just how they get oil to power their production facilities.

Which brings up this problem: how are we supposed to get energy without fossil fuels? Solar and wind energy might be catching on, but they're not on the news. We have to keep using fossil fuels because our technology leaves us with no cheaper or more available option.

 

[Lilani]

Is that Game of Thrones at the 50 seconds mark?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhbliUq0_r4#t=50

And why does Lego need to support Shell? Seems like a weird connection.

I'm sure it wasn't originally Lego "supporting" Shell. It was probably Shell wanted in on Lego's products since they are very well suited for...well, product placement. They wanted to put on a friendly face and look like a family company so they made a deal with Lego to allow their name to be used in certain kinds of playsets Lego might want to do, like gas stations in car playsets and such things.

It didn't take long for Lego to drop them though, so obviously the deal wasn't that great. Or Lego just doesn't see it as a battle worth fighting.

 

[SexyGarfield]

Well since Greenpeace doesn't like oil I hope all their supporters and workers refuse to use any health services that rely on oil for power and fuel as well as plastic for the making of medical equipment.

Not to mention the Greenpeace leadership's use of private jets so they don't have to mix with the 'plebeian's'.

You realize that you can be against the practices of a group and the ubiquity of it's byproducts without cutting off all the advantages the byproducts bring, right? Did the United States shun the English language just to spite the English? Do advocates for telcom competition refuse the use of cellphones or internet services just because the only players in the field are virtual monopolies?

There are certain resources that one must use to be an effective entity today be it oil, internet services or language. Using a resource does not contractually obligate you to agree with all of it's uses or the practices of it's producer. The uses of oil you mention currently have no reasonable substitute but they represent a small portion of what oil is used for. There are many uses that consume much more and do have alternatives which would reduce the need to drill in the Arctic.

 

[MrFalconfly]

But how can Greenpeace use a mouse and keyboard, when their fists are made of Ham?

Great question.

But then again we've also witnessed amoeba-colonies make gas-expulsions resembling human speech (EA's "Player First" thing).

 

[TallanKhan]

Greenpeace make me sick. They are essentially just a lobbying group and collection of pseudo-terrorist thugs masquerading as an international charity.

In 2011 (Can't find more recent data) Greenpeace spent almost 240 million euros, employing 2,150 full time equivalent staff. All of the income that supported that expenditure was tax exempt because of their charity status. Now, of all this money that was spent "protecting the planet", how much was spent on renewable energy installations? None. How much was spent on planting trees? None. How much was spent actually cleaning up our oh-so polluted environment? None.

So what did Greenpeace spend nearly 240 million euros on in 2011? Stunts, tying up legitimate businesses in court cases and above all else lobbying. Now while I'm appalled by the wasted money that could have actually been spent making a positive difference to the world, it is the lobbying that leaves me angriest. Lobbying, on it's cleanest day is a perversion of democratic principles, trying to force elected representatives to prioritise the interests of a single group over the mandate provided by those who elected them. More often than not, however, lobbying amounts to little more than institutionalised corruption and as far as I'm concerned any organisation engaging in the practice automatically forfeits any claim to the moral high ground.

In this instance, I feel desperately sorry for Lego. Lego and Shell represented a perfectly legitimate business partnership, after all, what do people think plastic is made of? While it may be popular to demonise oil companies this is in reality little different than a food producer's name or logo appearing on a final packed product on a supermarket shelf.

Finally, I'll just throw this in here, seeing the Shell logo on Lego pieces, and subsequently asking questions, is how I as a kid first learned about plastic being made from oil.

 

[Thedutchjelle]

I thought it was a pretty good vid, but then I don't really like Shell and other oil companies completely immoral behavior in a lot of things.
It wasn't exactly subtle, but no environmental vids are usually. I think being more direct brings across the point faster. People should leave the Arctic alone, we already got enough.

Eh, now I'm feeling all cynical again about humans not ever fucking changing anything :\

And why does Lego need to support Shell? Seems like a weird connection.

Lego products are made from plastic, which has some relation to oil, I guess. Maybe the relation is just how they get oil to power their production facilities.

Which brings up this problem: how are we supposed to get energy without fossil fuels? Solar and wind energy might be catching on, but they're not on the news. We have to keep using fossil fuels because our technology leaves us with no cheaper or more available option.

Nuclear power works pretty well, but the public is not in favour of it.

 

[tm96]

Am I missing something here? Lego is plastic which is a byproduct of oil. Well ok it not like Shell make the lego and I did read that the connection is that Lego make Shell label toy oil truck etc.
Overall I doubt Lego are moved by the ad rather that they are probably offended by it covering their products in black liquid or making their own ending to their movie.

Personally, I would do a spoof like this.

Pres. Business: Tell me why I should agree to this deal?
Nutshell Executive: Just simply put my logo on to your latest toy line and I'll happily supply the materials for cheap.
Pres. Business: Oh really?
(Pres. Business turns on video monitor showing Emmet)
Pres. Business: Emmet, what's the situation?

Emmet: Whew what a day its been barely made it. But we've still... kinda got a big mess over here.
Wyldstyle: Whose big dumb idea was it to build the oil platform 10 feet from this?! (pans to a lovely arctic scene).
(Pres. Business turns off monitor)
Pres. Business: I have enough bad rep as it is without your stupidness rubbing off on me. The deal's off and get out of my office before I call the robots.
Nutshell Executive: But...
Pres. Business: Robots! (Lots of robots appear behind Pres. Business)

I laughed at this. If Greenpeace used this (the spoof script I have quoted) more often rather than their stupid stunts (Russian oil rig) I would be less annoyed by them.I understand their concern about oil drilling in the arctic but putting Lego in the crosshairs rather than just Shell seems well somewhat dum but I can't reach a clear cut opinion on this.

 

[BeerTent]

I thought it was a pretty good vid, but then I don't really like Shell and other oil companies completely immoral behavior in a lot of things.
It wasn't exactly subtle, but no environmental vids are usually. I think being more direct brings across the point faster. People should leave the Arctic alone, we already got enough.

Eh, now I'm feeling all cynical again about humans not ever fucking changing anything :\

And why does Lego need to support Shell? Seems like a weird connection.

Lego products are made from plastic, which has some relation to oil, I guess. Maybe the relation is just how they get oil to power their production facilities.

Which brings up this problem: how are we supposed to get energy without fossil fuels? Solar and wind energy might be catching on, but they're not on the news. We have to keep using fossil fuels because our technology leaves us with no cheaper or more available option.

Nuclear power works pretty well, but the public is not in favour of it.

It really is a shame, because just about every meltdown has been caused by pure negligence and idiocy. Furthermore, we had a close call in Japan a while back, but the media blew that one out of proportion and said that people and animals were dying.

Nuclear power really IS safe, provided you have the equipment for it. And, really... Are you going to tell me that in this day and age, 1st world countries don't have the resources for more plants?

 

[Harry Mason]

God, I love it when corporations actually make changes to policy when confronted with a moral dilemma. I love Lego even more now.

Seriously? Fuck Shell.

 

[RicoADF]

It really is a shame, because just about every meltdown has been caused by pure negligence and idiocy. Furthermore, we had a close call in Japan a while back, but the media blew that one out of proportion and said that people and animals were dying.

Nuclear power really IS safe, provided you have the equipment for it. And, really... Are you going to tell me that in this day and age, 1st world countries don't have the resources for more plants?

When it works Nuclear power is amazing, the problem is when something goes wrong it's catastrophic. I'm glad Australia doesn't use Nuclear power plants and hope we never do, prefer solar and wind myself (since we get alot of sun it'd work for us). I get that Nuclear power in theory could be safe and all but as you pointed out it's human error &/or natural disasters that undo the safety measures. I don't trust humans to get it right every time all the time. Sooner or later someone will fuck up.

 

[small]

they also need to concentrate on the horrific damage that shell has done in nigeria. making places a toxic wasteland they will never clean up

 

[renegade7]

Well at the end of the day, plastic is made from oil, and you can't just recycle plastic bottles into material of the quality that goes into LEGO.

Though, I suppose there are better suppliers than Shell. It really would probably be best if LEGO stuck with a specialist plastic producer.