So now you can choose which brand personality suits you best: the corny, hokey, winky-winky approach of “Satisfries™,” or the compliments-the-intelligence-of-the-consumer, imaginative, bold personality of “Angry Whopper.” Which side are you on?
Well, there it is.
The miserable, ingratiating, too-cute, punning name (I can barely bring myself to type it) “Satisfries™” on the top panel; the brilliant, clever, engaging, delightful name “Angry Whopper” on the bottom panel.
Now we can all choose which side we’re on.
That Angry name, in that bold san serif type, even survives the lame, sissy, punning reference to “an old flame” which is an archaic, arcane, lazy, lazy, lazy repurposing of a phrase last used in a situation other than an advertisement in 1947. And the typeface for that lazy copy subhead is so dominated by the proud, bold, confident typeface they used for Angry Whopper, I bet most people don’t even see it.
I wish there were a situation where Burger King’s son could return, like Simba in The Lion King, from some wilderness, and overthrow the usurpers sitting on the current throne—regardless of business and product-marketing-mix issues (about which I am ambivalent: the lower-fat fry product is a good initiative, and a positive development for American Eaters), their current brand personality is more suited to a purse store than a fast food joint called BURGER KING. Dammit.
I understand that some important demographic groups were creeped out by the final years of The King. I think The King might have gotten a little too perverted-seeming for a large segment of the population. In retrospect, that was probably a strategic error. Still.
Talk about pendulum swings.
