1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

WTF: David Spade's Direct TV commercial

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by BYH, Oct 22, 2009.

Page 4 of 8
  1. TheSportsPredictor

    TheSportsPredictor Well-Known Member

    David Spade's sorry and wouldn't do it again, but moreso because you didn't like it than it being tasteless:

    http://tv.msn.com/the-wrap/spade-regrets-farley-ad/story/?GT1=28103
     
    TheSportsPredictor, Oct 29, 2009
    #37
  2. Herky_Jerky

    Herky_Jerky Member

    I didn't see anything wrong with ad and didn't even think it could be deemed offensive until I read this thread.

    In fact, I think it's probably the best one in this entire series of DirecTv spots.

    The new one with Dana Carvey might be second.
     
    Herky_Jerky, Oct 30, 2009
    #38
  3. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    If the Farley family doesn't have a problem with it, and somebody is willing to cut the check - I've got no problem with it.
    For the most part the ads are ripping off sequels or less than classic movies.
    Now if I see Alec Baldwin slumming and doing his Always Be Closing scene to sell DirectTV - I'll be pissed.
     
    DanOregon, Oct 30, 2009
    #39
  4. slytiger

    slytiger Member

    Exactly, Farley's family would have been compensated.

    I'm sure we all remember John Wayne selling light beer from beyond the grave.
     
    slytiger, Oct 30, 2009
    #40
  5. Bubbler

    Bubbler Well-Known Member

    Farley's family? I understand your point, but people inside families sell out other family members all the time. If they thought Farley himself wouldn't have a problem with the ad, that's one thing, but if they were using his image to make money for themselves, that's weak sauce.
     
    Bubbler, Oct 30, 2009
    #41
  6. Buck

    Buck Well-Known Member

    Are you really concerned about Chris Farley's legacy or the artistic integrity of 'Tommy Boy'?
    No matter how fond you were of Farley or the movie, let's have a little perspective.
    This isn't Joyce and 'Ulysses.'
     
    Buck, Oct 30, 2009
    #42
  7. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    A conservative estimate would be that the Farley family received $250K for the spot. It wouldn't stun me if it was twice that.

    Sometimes you do what you gotta do.
     
    Mizzougrad96, Oct 30, 2009
    #43
  8. EStreetJoe

    EStreetJoe Well-Known Member

    While the Spade one was in bad taste, the new one with Donna Dixon redoing the laundromat scene from Wayne's World is just plain bad.
     
    EStreetJoe, Oct 30, 2009
    #44
  9. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    If John Lennon can sell video games and Walt Whitman can sell jeans, I don't have a problem with Chris Farley selling satellite TV.
     
    DanOregon, Oct 30, 2009
    #45
  10. Buck

    Buck Well-Known Member

    That's what I'm saying.
    Pantene can have the Mona Lisa washing her hair - a work of art that has been admired for hundreds of years.
    But don't defile the cut-rate comedy I loved in college!
     
    Buck, Oct 30, 2009
    #46
  11. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I don't think anyone is complaining that they defiled "Tommy Boy." I think it's more of an issue of mocking someone who died.
     
    Mizzougrad96, Oct 30, 2009
    #47
  12. ifilus

    ifilus Well-Known Member


    Isn't that Kim Basinger?
     
    ifilus, Oct 30, 2009
    #48
Page 4 of 8
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page