[brundolf]

I'm not Japanese and it was upsetting to me

Not because eg one piano got destroyed; surely that happens all the time, even on camera for eg movies and such. But there was something about watching beautiful objects be destroyed, in slow motion, gratuitously, and with an upbeat/sunny tone, that just aesthetically made me squirm in my seat

[shmageggy]

It goes beyond aesthetics for me. It's like they took everyone's deepest fears about technology and AI, that it will replace or "crush" authentic human experience and creativity, and they just embraced and celebrate it by literally crushing representations of human creativity. At least I'm glad the corporate types were actually honest about their goals, though, instead of their typical doublespeak

[dogman144]

This was what I understood it to be as well, they let it split out by accident/enough group think. I’ve worked in tech long enough to firmly believe this sentiment exists.

[leptons]

Agreed, that's exactly how tech companies are, and Apple is one of the biggest. Apple doesn't really care what people create, so long as they are buying an Apple product to create it on. It doesn't matter that an iPad doesn't feel or sound like a trumpet. If someone buys their product to learn to play a trumpet or a piano, then they were the fool parting with their money that Apple was hoping to find, and there's a lot of them apparently.

[HenryBemis]

Exactly that.

They predicted/showed us the future that is coming. They said/showed the quiet part loud.

[lubesGordi]

Its such a testament to how indoctrinated and homogeneous that environment is.

[supriyo-biswas]

Exactly my thoughts - this ad does very little to invoke the desire for the product, unlike many other Apple ads.

It's not like Apple has forgotten how to make such ads - the recent one for iPhones with family members asking to not be let go while the owner tries to delete photos represented a familiar experience of people trying to free up storage, and how they wouldn't have to do that if they bought a new iPhone.

On the other hand, this ad just shows stuff being destroyed, just like some of those useless Youtube videos which shows perfectly usable stuff being destroyed under the pretext of "ASMR" or whatnot. Not only is it very difficult to watch as someone who didn't have a lot of money and was taught to make careful use of it from an early age, it just invokes negative vibes, as if possessing a musical instrument is something to be ashamed of.

[whywhywhywhy]

Their marketing team has been missing the mark for a while. The “big and bigger” billboards with people in the distance holding up phones to the camera with a giant hand tiny body look feels like something Samsung would have done in the early 10’s

[vorador]

Also the ad where mother nature visits apple park to check in on their green targets. Did she park her car at their huge garage too? (https://archive.curbed.com/2017/4/13/15274024/apples-new-cam...)

[jacobsimon]

I haven’t seen anyone mention this yet, but I think the concept here was inspired by all the viral hydraulic press videos on Instagram and TikTok. Here’s a similar video showing random objects and consumer products being crushed in slow motion with similar upbeat music: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q9BtYEnrkg4

[brundolf]

Sure, maybe that was the intent. But most of the objects I see in the linked video are cheap and mass-produced (a water bottle, some sticky notes, some plastic toys), which makes it feel totally different

[xdennis]

I'm not bothered by the destruction. Destruction itself can have artistic value. For example, you can't portray the Nazis on screen without showing how destructive they were.

What bothers me is the arrogance to say that an iPad, a device which will be obsolete in a few short years, can replace all those instruments and tools that last more than a generation.

This is similar to the history channels which use AI colorized historical footage which wildly shifts objects from red to blue in a few frames and have the audacity to claim this is an improvement over the original.

[wccrawford]

I am. If they had a "No objects were harmed in the making of this ad" notice at the end, I'd feel much, much better about it.

It would still bother a lot of people for other reasons, but it's the wanton destruction that bothers me the most.

[FrustratedMonky]

I had same reaction to the 'niceness' of what they were crushing. Things looked too good, like still usable. What if they were slightly older and dinged, scuffed up, looked more like they were done being useful.

[s3p]

For me it was just because of the damage it caused. I guess if I heard someone was throwing out a piano I wouldn't think much of it, but the destruction of everything in the ad made me uneasy. I just felt like it was so wasteful to destroy things in the way they did. But again, maybe I have a double standard, because if I saw someone throw a trumpet or an old camera in the dumpster I probably would not care as much.

[lifeinthevoid]

It looks animated to me, I don't think a lot of real objects were destroyed. (Not an expert though)

[dns_snek]

I don't think these objects being real or not makes much (if any) difference to those who view the ad negatively. The underlying idea that Apple is crushing these tools of human entertainment and creative expression, only to replace them with their own "jack of all trades" remains the same.

[mort96]

Can confirm. I reacted negatively to the ad (in a "this ad causes emotions which the creators absolutely does not want an ad to cause" kind of way), and for me it's all about the imagery and symbolism. I hope and assume that the destruction is primarily CGI, but the visuals of destroying positive "soulful" things like instruments and replacing it with a lifeless slab of glass just doesn't sell the product to me.

In fact, I think this would have been an excellent art piece if the message was "heartless tech corporations want to destroy the good things in life and replace it with a cold slab of glass".

[pantulis]

At first I had a negative reaction. Then, looking for comfort, noticed that the video is mostly CGI. But then again, I felt the same. It is what you say: the image of destruction of beautiful objects is bad per se, it's not what the objects are, it's what they represent.

[kzrdude]

Without expertise I would just casually guess that a hydraulic press this size does not exist, or if it did, it would not be used for that. So at least that part is CG.

[Hamuko]

Yeah, it looks super CGI to my eyes. Especially the desk and the piano. I also can't imagine anyone trying to direct this kind of a video without having precise control on what the destruction looks like.