The dancing Kia soul Hamsters are back!

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: cchase


You don't pick Eminem to do a commercial if you don't want to ride on his fame from rapping and white-trashiness.


He's famous and from somewhere in or near Detroit. Could be that, and not his "white trash" that caused them to pick him. [/quote]

The way I understand it, is that Chrysler picked the music first. After Mathers was approached about licensing the song for the ad, he expressed interest in being more involved. Below is from an article explaining how the ad came together...

"Melissa Garlick, head of Chrysler's advertising, said Eminem's involvement grew quickly after the musician was approached for the rights to use music from the song "Lose Yourself."

But using Eminem was a risk, given his history of sexist lyrics, prescription drug abuse and harsh language. Marchionne told Forbes in a report published Monday that casting the controversial star was a tough call."

 

[Cutehumor]

Originally Posted By: NHHEMI


their dancing hampsters with dancing robots. the other one is with eminem. so which commerical has more ghettoness to me..hmm.


I could care less what he does with his life. In that commercial there is no ghetto factor. He is dressed like a normal human being and what is said has NOTHING to do with rap or the ghetto. There is no comparison between the hoodrat hampsters and him in those commercials. [/quote]

I guess your not hearing eminem's rap song beating in the background of the Chrysler commercial the whole time. You convinced me! dancing hoodrat hampsters vs dancing cartoon robots, it's very ghetto!

cheers mate

 

[urchin]

I actually think the hampsters are actually are actually a thinly veiled stab at the typical serf who has to buy this model, yes the elite are laughing at you not with you.

 

[Cutehumor]

Originally Posted By: urchin
I actually think the hampsters are actually are actually a thinly veiled stab at the typical serf who has to buy this model, yes the elite are laughing at you not with you.


sorry urchin, I don't own actually actually own a Kia model.

 

[urchin]

I understand that cutehumor.

I'm talking about the folks that do own this model.

I certainly don't like being tagged a "hampster".

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: rjundi
Originally Posted By: DreamerGT
There is absolutely nothing ghetto about the hamsters, the hamsters are more in the rave/electronic culture.



+1


Point is? Is rave/electronic the same sloppy clothing, just different capability of conversing in proper English?

Doesnt look much different to me. Maybe that is a differentiation for those below and above the poverty line?


What does poverty line have to do with class or looks? It simply an economic level nothing else. Not sure how it can be interpolated into broad blanket generalizations based on music or clothing.

btw my wife grew up well below poverty line mainly due to two working parents with 5 children.

 

[urchin]

Originally Posted By: rjundi
[What does poverty line have to do with class or looks? It simply an economic level nothing else. Not sure how it can be interpolated into broad blanket generalizations based on music or clothing.
.



Actually "poverty" especially today in the USA has morphed into something of a specific culture all its own.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: urchin
Originally Posted By: rjundi
[What does poverty line have to do with class or looks? It simply an economic level nothing else. Not sure how it can be interpolated into broad blanket generalizations based on music or clothing.
.



Actually "poverty" especially today in the USA has morphed into something of a specific culture all its own.


Exactly. And the low/too large pants, "hoodie", untied sneakers, pants at your ankles at least on the surface appears to be elements of both sets. The difference is that there are true have-nots that are "ghetto", then the wannabes, then the electronic folks who absolutely share elements of the style and behavior.

So my point is valid, how do they differ, is it just the parents' income levels? I doubt that those who live in the depths of Camden and dress like that are going to be claiming electric/rave, nor are those living uptown going to claim the opposite.

 

[rjundi]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: urchin
Originally Posted By: rjundi
[What does poverty line have to do with class or looks? It simply an economic level nothing else. Not sure how it can be interpolated into broad blanket generalizations based on music or clothing.
.



Actually "poverty" especially today in the USA has morphed into something of a specific culture all its own.


Exactly. And the low/too large pants, "hoodie", untied sneakers, pants at your ankles at least on the surface appears to be elements of both sets. The difference is that there are true have-nots that are "ghetto", then the wannabes, then the electronic folks who absolutely share elements of the style and behavior.

So my point is valid, how do they differ, is it just the parents' income levels? I doubt that those who live in the depths of Camden and dress like that are going to be claiming electric/rave, nor are those living uptown going to claim the opposite.


Your point may apply more I guess in your area. Thankfully not ours. Poverty is real in our northern parts, neighboring western Maine and outskirts of VT. However none of those things you mention really exist here.

 

[JHZR2]

Really? For living in one of the richest states, and growing up in more or less the richest area (alas, I wasnt one of the rich ones), there were still a lot of kids that took on these styles.

Thus my comment of the electronic/rave types just being a higher wealth-level variant of the other group. its a way to keep certain elements and yet not be associated.

Sure, there is the J Press and Martha's Vineyard type crowds too, but there is always a counterculture, even in the well to do spots.