The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
How many have seen it?
When I first saw it, I had an idea it would have something to do with Road Safety, but the impact was far more shocking than I expected.
They make this stuff look so real.
Excellent method of reaching out to the Teenage audience though, let's just hope the message isn't ignored.
[URL]http://www.thinkroadsafety.gov.uk/campaigns/teenagers/teenagers.htm[/URL] if you haven't seen it.
When I first saw it, I had an idea it would have something to do with Road Safety, but the impact was far more shocking than I expected.
They make this stuff look so real.
Excellent method of reaching out to the Teenage audience though, let's just hope the message isn't ignored.
[URL]http://www.thinkroadsafety.gov.uk/campaigns/teenagers/teenagers.htm[/URL] if you haven't seen it.
Page:
Blank wrote:
> It's a good advert, but I prefer the one with the little blonde girl
> who says "If you hit me at forty, there's an eighty per cent
> chance I'll die, but if you hit me at thirty, there's a 20% chance
> I'll live" and then starts bodypopping against a tree.
I suggest you re-read that.
"80% chance I'll die if you do 40, 20% chance I'll live if you're doing 30"?
Same thing mate.
It's 80% for both.
> It's a good advert, but I prefer the one with the little blonde girl
> who says "If you hit me at forty, there's an eighty per cent
> chance I'll die, but if you hit me at thirty, there's a 20% chance
> I'll live" and then starts bodypopping against a tree.
I suggest you re-read that.
"80% chance I'll die if you do 40, 20% chance I'll live if you're doing 30"?
Same thing mate.
It's 80% for both.
Bullett wrote:
> He may
> have gave a quick look up and down the road,
Even a quick look should be enough to notify you of a car hurtling towards you at 50mph, and there's no way you can corner at more than about 15-20 mps anyway, so that's out the window.
Anyway, it's still a great advert for road safety, so let's not quibble.
> He may
> have gave a quick look up and down the road,
Even a quick look should be enough to notify you of a car hurtling towards you at 50mph, and there's no way you can corner at more than about 15-20 mps anyway, so that's out the window.
Anyway, it's still a great advert for road safety, so let's not quibble.
I say do fifty and make sure of it! :-)
It's a good advert, but I prefer the one with the little blonde girl who says "If you hit me at forty, there's an eighty per cent chance I'll die, but if you hit me at thirty, there's a 20% chance I'll live" and then starts bodypopping against a tree.
A year or so back, a girl aged about 14 ran out of a bush into the centre of a dual carriageway, she was hit by a car and died.
This was near where I live, and the driver got done for it.
How on earth can you react to something like that when you're travelling at 70mph?
This was near where I live, and the driver got done for it.
How on earth can you react to something like that when you're travelling at 70mph?
Bonus wrote:
> That would be ok if the government (in Scotland at least) hadn't
> sounded out plans for making the driver in every accident involving
> someone under 16, or maybe 14, responsible whether it was their fault
> or not.
Genuis. What a good idea. How utterly and completely fair and rational.
> That would be ok if the government (in Scotland at least) hadn't
> sounded out plans for making the driver in every accident involving
> someone under 16, or maybe 14, responsible whether it was their fault
> or not.
Genuis. What a good idea. How utterly and completely fair and rational.
Bullett wrote:
> So the driver was speeding, that's not the point. For a start, the
> kid tried crossing between two parked cars - that's just asking to be
> run over as it's damn near impossible to see anyone attempting to
> cross from such a place until they're actually in the road. He may
> have gave a quick look up and down the road, but had he stopped a
> little longer and made sure it was 100% safe (there could have been a
> bend back where the car came from), he may not have got hit. Stop,
> Look & Listen? He just had a quick look and carried on oblivious
> to anything but the 'fun' he was having with his mates.
That would be ok if the government (in Scotland at least) hadn't sounded out plans for making the driver in every accident involving someone under 16, or maybe 14, responsible whether it was their fault or not.
> So the driver was speeding, that's not the point. For a start, the
> kid tried crossing between two parked cars - that's just asking to be
> run over as it's damn near impossible to see anyone attempting to
> cross from such a place until they're actually in the road. He may
> have gave a quick look up and down the road, but had he stopped a
> little longer and made sure it was 100% safe (there could have been a
> bend back where the car came from), he may not have got hit. Stop,
> Look & Listen? He just had a quick look and carried on oblivious
> to anything but the 'fun' he was having with his mates.
That would be ok if the government (in Scotland at least) hadn't sounded out plans for making the driver in every accident involving someone under 16, or maybe 14, responsible whether it was their fault or not.
put some tape on your bike
use some paint if you like
... but get yourself seen.
use some paint if you like
... but get yourself seen.
FinalFantasyFanatic wrote:
> What message exactly could be ignored?
Err, let me think. Oh yeah, the 'being careful when crossing the road' bit.
So the driver was speeding, that's not the point. For a start, the kid tried crossing between two parked cars - that's just asking to be run over as it's damn near impossible to see anyone attempting to cross from such a place until they're actually in the road. He may have gave a quick look up and down the road, but had he stopped a little longer and made sure it was 100% safe (there could have been a bend back where the car came from), he may not have got hit. Stop, Look & Listen? He just had a quick look and carried on oblivious to anything but the 'fun' he was having with his mates.
I can't believe you didn't get that. The whole advert is about distraction, be it from a Mobile phone, your friends, whatever.
> What message exactly could be ignored?
Err, let me think. Oh yeah, the 'being careful when crossing the road' bit.
So the driver was speeding, that's not the point. For a start, the kid tried crossing between two parked cars - that's just asking to be run over as it's damn near impossible to see anyone attempting to cross from such a place until they're actually in the road. He may have gave a quick look up and down the road, but had he stopped a little longer and made sure it was 100% safe (there could have been a bend back where the car came from), he may not have got hit. Stop, Look & Listen? He just had a quick look and carried on oblivious to anything but the 'fun' he was having with his mates.
I can't believe you didn't get that. The whole advert is about distraction, be it from a Mobile phone, your friends, whatever.
I bet it smarted.
Page: