I have no idea what they're selling. My only guess is it's some hair removal wax for the naughty bits, but if so, I don't get the tag line "Maybe too sticky?" Or why they decided to use an old man for it.

At first glance this looks like a Geico caveman and that's already annoying. If I saw this in a magazine, I might have the same thought and skim it without any consideration. On further inspection, it's still not an appealing ad. They could have used a more marketable surfer and gotten the same message across. This guy looks homeless.

Not only does this ad not give me a clue what Sexwax is (I sincerely hope that it is surfboard wax and not something kinky), but I'm pretty grossed out. Was the hairy old man really necessary? I'm staying away from Sexwax and the hairy old men who use it.

I love surfing & Sex Wax is the brand of board wax everyone uses, but I've never seen the Geico caveman catching waves? This ad just doesn't cater to their target audience. It's mildly humorous, but this hairy guy is really unappealing and he looks a little too withdrawn about getting his chest hair ripped off. Most of the consumers that would buy their product are spicoli-like surfer dudes not grizzly middle aged men.

This seems like a very traditional way of advertising beauty products. Gisele is absolutely gorgeous and grabs the attention of male or female who sees the ad. The whole feel is very glamorous and luxurious. I'd like to see something more creative or eye-catching, but for a label like D&G and their customer, this works.

I'm pretty sure an advertisement with Giselle Bundchen in it is guaranteed not to suck. If Giselle thinks this perfume is so good, I would at least smell a sample of it if I see it in a store. And if she was doing an for anything else (cleaning product? breakfast cereal?), I would probably give that product a shot as well. Good call on the spokes model, Dolce & Gabbana.

It's very plain. It looks like the standard model picture that's supposed to sell any product. It doesn't really look all that glamorous and if you're flipping through Vogue, this picture would get lost among all the other ones that look just like it.

But it's not great. I give it points for finding a creative way to show that their haircare product will keep your hair healthy. However, the imagery of the skeleton isn't exactly appealing, so I don't know if it works overall. Maybe a better image would have been an older woman with beautiful hair, like that in the picture. I'd find that ad more amusing and less creepy, even though an old woman with hair like that has it's own creepiness factor.

No one wants to associate any product with death. I'll give it that it's more creative than the average hair care product ad but unfortunately, it's not creative in a good way. It looks like someone threw a wig on a corpse.

At first I thought this was an ad for skincare because that's what Nivea usually makes, so I didn't understand it. Upon a closer look it's actually pretty funny to think of a corpse still having luscious locks. A couple critiques though would be that dead people are pretty morbid, and perhaps choosing a more natural looking hair color than Little Mermaid red.

Ah!! This is super creepy, not to mention that that hair looks like a bad wig. I hope that years from now if someone digs me up my hair has decomposed; I wouldn't want to scare them like this scared me. I will not be using Nivea, thanks.

I’m just not sure what I’m supposed to take away from this ad. Is the idea that Nivea ensures that your hair will be nicely preserved when archaeologists find you in three thousand years? That’s both completely illogical and really, really creepy. I would actually be worried about a hair care product that prevented my hair from disintegrating while my bones deteriorated, and the wild, curly hair does not make this flat-iron obsessed girl want to try Nivea.

As I seem to say in most of my responses, this ad doesn't tell me why their car is better. It just says that the car is "attractive," and maybe some people buy cards based on looks, but I sure as Hell don't. Also, my girlfriend snuck a peek and sighed her dissatisfaction over the car covering the face of the woman. I didn't have a problem with that, but women might, apparently.

Sex always sells and this ad is a combination of sex and humor that ends up working really well. It also goes really well with the ads tagline "The Ultimate Attraction." It's sexy and

I think this is pretty much sums up every girl's worst nightmare and every guy's fantasy. This ad now makes me associate guys that drive BMW's with them being chauvinist pigs. No woman would want to be with someone that is more into their car then their girlfriend. There's a way to create an ad that both men and women find sexy but this is not it.

My guy friends always like to make the "paper bag" reference about certain girls, but this takes that idea to a whole new level. Props to whoever thought of this ad (I just hope it doesn't happen in real life).

This ad is pretty funny, primarily because the concept is so absurd. The people are not particularly attractive, and the BMW in the magazine is actually really fug, but the guy’s expression and focus on that car make the ad. Based on the image of the car, I am not interested in buying a BMW, but the ad does grab my attention, and I now have BMW on my mind if nothing else.

This is a cute way of making women feel better about their bodies. That isn't to say that all 3 billion women who aren't supermodels look like this doll, but it is nice not to see one of the "eight" supermodels in an ad for once.

This ad might not be pretty to look at, but it has some truth to it. Not only are they appealing to the "normal" population, they're also encouraging healthy body image. That's a good message and it makes an effective ad.

Ironic that in my critique of Abercrombie showcasing only "beautiful" people, the next ad I look at is for Body Shop. I think it's a great way to point out to self-concious women that hardly anyone looks like the people in ads, such as those in the Abercrombie ads. The manican thing is a nice touch, although I will admit that I winced for a moment, but that's simply because my eye has been trained to expect the "beautiful" people. Overall, this is a nice start to begin showing people it's okay to wear clothes that fit you.

I understand that it isn't healthy for young girls to strive to be as thin as supermodels, but it's not healthier for girls to become fat asses either. Call me old fashioned, but I don't think self-improvement is evil. If you feel ok handing your little daughter this doll to play with, you might as well tell her that a high school diploma and the trailor park are good enough too. We are already the world's most obese country, but do we have to be the least motivated too?

I absolutely loathe the Dove “real beauty” ads, but this ad works for me. The difference is that the Dove ads feature real women who have had a lot of retouching but are still fundamentally unattractive. I don’t want to see unattractive people plastered on buses and billboards, and the ads just make me uncomfortable. On the other hand, this image is clearly mocking Barbie and is absurd enough to be kind of funny. I’m used to Body Shop ads that just feature products or promote hemp moisturizers, so this new campaign is unexpected and effective.

The message of this ad is so empowering. So often ads show unrealistic airbrushed images and this is just raw and real. It is a healthy reminder that most people and most of their customers do not fit the supermodel mold.

I'm not a homophobe in the least but, this ad doesn't appeal to guys or girls. The guys in the ad are attractive and shirtless but they're also look like they're having a little too much fun with eachother to be into chicks.

OK, so on the surface, this one does suck a little bit. Heterosexual males may not be attracted to the boxers in this somewhat homo-erotic ad. But, when the same heterosexual males hear girls talking about how hot this ad is, they may just want to buy those Abercrombie boxers.

This is a terrible ad, especially for a brand that already gets enough flak for being too preppy. Not only does this have weird homoerotic undertones that I don't think make it appealing to the general male population, it also looks like it came from a bad prison movie.

I've always felt that Abercrombie has horrendous advertising and I probably am not shedding any new light or wisdom with my critique. I agree with the sentiment of most advertising minded people that their ads don't showcase why their products are superior to their competitors. The same goes for this ad; I have no idea why there boxers are so great. It seems that they're easier to pull off based on the excited expression of one of the guy's in the ad, but that's just a shot in the dark. I will submit, though, that this common critique of Abercrombie could be moot, because they are obviously successful, so maybe all people want to see is beautiful people wearing something and they'll buy it. Then, for some people, there's the moral aspect of holding consumers to the model standard, which generally leads to problems with teenagers, but that's a whole other topic.

Advertising for a brand of boxers by using a prison-like gang bang scene in the shower is as terrible as advertising for condoms using a convicted rapist. The message I'm getting is that I should buy Abercrombie boxers so I'll have fun too when my friends & I run a train on another boy. This ad makes me want to buy a machine gun and a chastity belt, not Abercrombie boxers. What were they thinking?! Worst ad ever.

It makes sense that an ad for boxers would include guys in their underwear; it does not make sense that those guys would be pulling down each other’s boxers while frolicking in the shower. To me, this ad screams prison shower gang bang, and that poor guy hunched over in the middle is about to get it. I’m no homophobe, but a gleeful homosexual (and possibly non-consensual) romp doesn’t strike me as what Abercrombie is all about.

Soco is everything men are looking for in a drink: it packs the strength of roofies without the messy legal consequences. Think of the savings on lawyer fees! Not the most original ad though, men have been using liquor to get laid since Jesus made the first glass of wine. I'm just worried that some men may be confused how to use the product; for clarification, the trick is to get women to drink it first...not smash them over the head with the bottle.

SoCo ads are always terrible. I don’t know many people who drink SoCo, and when they do, it’s part of a cocktail, not on its own. I never buy SoCo because I don’t really know what to do with it, and the ads don’t help me out. Additionally, the panty remover claim just doesn’t make sense. If you’re 15, Smirnoff Ice is a panty remover because it tastes like candy, so you’ll drink enough to get drunk. If you’re in college, sufficient quantities of pretty much anything can be a panty remover. SoCo is decidedly not a panty remover because 15 year olds don’t bother with liqueurs, and for college kids, it has less alcohol content than vodka or tequila.

I feel like Southern Comfort is more of a guy's drink and they would definitely appreciate this ad and find it "awesome" As a girl i think it's a little degrading but its still pretty funny and sex sells.

This ad is hilarious. I'm sure somewhere out there some "sophisticate" or feminist or someone is hating on this ad big-time, but if you want to appeal to the college guy/frat boy crowd (and let's be honest, that's a pretty big market for alcohol), this is the way to do it. Plus, even if you're not necessarily looking for "liquid panty remover," this ad says that SoCo is fun, and who doesn't want to have fun when they drink?

This is a really clever ad and it plays on the whole alcohol can get you laid thing. However, where I think the ad fails is that it doesn't fit the brand at all. Southern Comfort wouldn't come to mind as "the" liquid panty removing drink. I feel like if you asked

Female Perspective SUCKS: This Soco ad will surely garner at least a mild chuckle out of male consumers, but some female consumers might find the ad to be insulting or something along those lines. Obviously, though, the "panty remover" line would indicate that this ad is for male consumers, so my "DOESN'T SUCK" should be held in a higher regard than the "SUCKS" that females would probably give this ad.

There is absolutely no logic to this. I don't get how painting this baby like Ronald McDonald makes me want a nasty burger. Mind bogglingly awful.

This ad is one of the creepiest things I've ever seen. People hate clowns, so there's little hope for baby clowns. Not only is this unlikely to attract people to McDonald's, I'm sure it would put a lot of people off.

Whose bright idea was it to stick a creepy clown face on a newborn baby? Babies are supposed to be cute and innocent, not painted up like circus freaks. Also the fact that McDonalds is oversaturating the market with yet another one of their fast food restaurants in a place I can't even pronounce drives me a little insane.

My first reaction is that a/this baby is really creeping me out, and b/I wonder what Kimaya Kothrud is. Google isn’t too helpful because the first 50 or so hits are all about the ad and not about this mystery place. I’ve garner that it’s somewhere in India, so now the ad is making me angry. It’s bad enough that McDonald’s is as ubiquitous as Starbucks in the US; I don’t want to see and smell McDonald’s on every corner when I travel abroad. For the sake of full disclosure, I haven’t eaten at McDonald’s in about a decade, and I don’t think any ad could change my mind, but ads like this turn my dislike from benign to aggressive. I’m anti-lovin’ it.

I'm so used to seeing McDonald's ads showing off their delicious food that my first reaction was..."damn, I bet that baby tastes good." But then I remembered how awkward that Donner party was a while back, and I rethought my gut reaction. Unfortunately, there isn't a non-creepy way to think about an ad that alludes to Ronald McDonald having sex. And that's supposed to make me want to eat? This ad isn't clever, it's scarring and nauseating

Oh wow, this is frightening. I understand that McDonald's is so huge that they can put anything in their ads and their product will still sell, but a scary little clown baby? Really? I understand the whole "new McDonald's" angle that the ad is trying to take, but maybe there would be a better way of making that point.

Because I saw the file attachment named "Viagra," I got the twister joke right away and thought it was pretty damn funny. So if people know it is viagra ahead of time, it doesn't suck. But if people are to see that and have to look for the tiny pill at the bottom, I might lean towards "sucks," because the product shouldn't be the smallest thing on the image.

This ad is funny and pretty clever. A little bittongue in cheek but not inappropriate, which is the perfect mix for aproduct like Viagra.

The fact that an ad about old men having sex is not making me nauseous is point one for Pfizer. Viagra ads are rarely clever and usually include a picture of a target old man, so this reasonably amusing ad is a pleasant surprise. My main criticism is about the execution: the bedding doesn’t look rumpled enough to suggest that a “game of twister” just occurred, but it’s too messy to look inviting to new players. I also don’t know what’s with the kid pictures by the side of the bed; regardless of whether it is supposed to be the hypothetical couple’s children or them at a young age, it’s a little weird.

This is a completely unrealistic ad. First of all, the pictures on the nightstand suggest the inhabitants of this bed are upwards of 85 years old, and the only game I've seen senior citizens play is called "change my bedpan for a nickel." Secondly, from personal experience I can tell you that the game of sexual twister is just a big cock-tease, so I can only imagine that anyone playing it on viagra is likely to get a fatal case of blue balls. Plus, everyone knows it's more exciting when you play with a group of people.

Not only does this not suck, but it's pretty funny...until you get an image in your head of who's using Viagra and those Twister sheets (sorry to put that image in your head, by the way). Still, it's a witty ad that makes the product seem appealing and fun.

This is pretty tame for a sexual enhancement ad, but would appeal to an older generation because it's not so risque. I like the old school photos on the nightstand for effect next to the eyeglasses case and stack of books. You wouldn't know it was an ad for Viagra though just by looking at it.. probably a little too subtle.

This ad has some things going for it. The visual is striking and attention-grabbing. However, it took me a little bit of thinking to figure out that since you can "overtake faster" one of those big trucks can seem so small. If the average consumer can't see the the point immediately, they probably won't keep trying. Aside from

I just don’t get it. What are they overtaking? Why is there a mini truck with logs on the back? Where is the car? After thinking about it for a minute, I guess the point is that the truck is slow and the VW is passing it, but if that’s the case, the VW is also driving on the wrong side of the road. The real problem is that I did not understand the ad at first glance, and if I were flipping through a magazine and saw this, I would not have stopped to figure it out. I also associate VW with safety and reliability, and an ad advertising speedy driving undercuts that rather shifting the image in a positive way.

Maybe it's because I'm not much of a car guy, but I have no idea what they're trying to show me. My assumption is that they're implying their VWs have as much power as the vehicle in the picture. If so, it doesn't strike me as the greatest comparison. My last problem is that the picture looks overly photoshopped. Obviously ads are worked a lot, but this doesn't even look real to me.

This ad just leaves me confused. What car are they selling? I'm assuming it's not this little golf cart/tractor trailer/log truck. However, if the vehicle in the ad is in fact what VW is trying to sell, they may have more problems than just a sucky ad.

Honestly, I don't really understand this. Is this supposed to encourage children to aspire to be truck drivers? Anyway, this ad makes VW look like whopping pussies - like the Clay Aiken of the auto industry -- an embarrassing association they should promptly correct. The VW marketing team needs to watch a few Chuck Norris movies to kick the wimp out of themselves before they head back to the drawing board.