The unveiling of the big store chains’ Christmas ads seems to be a big event these days. Leader of the pack is John Lewis, who have given us adorable kids, shopping snowmen and, this year, horny lonely penguins.
Sainsbury’s, meanwhile, have upped the ante on heartstring-tugging with their commercial inspired by the First World War. It’s based upon the legendary Christmas Truce of 1914, when some German and British troops emerged from their front lines to exchange gifts, sing carols and even play a football match or two.
Watching it for the first time, I felt uncomfortable. There was something, I don’t know… off about it. The ad was made with the co-operation of the Royal British Legion, who will receive a cut of the proceeds from some of Sainsbury’s Christmas food. But exploiting one of the bloodiest wars in history to get people through the doors of a supermarket? That seems wrong to me.
There was something beyond that, though – something which was unsettling to me, and I couldn’t quite put my finger on what it was. Then I saw this column by Ally Fogg in the Guardian, which nails it:-
Exploiting the first world war for commercial gain is tasteless. This, however, is not what disturbs me most. The really upsetting details are the stunning shot of the robin on the wire, the actors’ trembles as they cautiously emerge from the trenches, half expecting a sniper’s bullet, the flicker of understanding in the eyes as the young soldiers reach into their pockets at the end. The film-makers here have done something to the first world war which is perhaps the most dangerous and disrespectful act of all: they have made it beautiful.
It’s also worth bearing in mind that higher-ups in the army on both sides forbade the Christmas 1914 events from happening again. On subsequent Christmas Days the soldiers blasted away at each other, as they did every other day of the war.
Iceland’s advert (starring Peter Andre) looks positively tasteful by comparison.