How Rental Discrimination Inspired a Series of Dark Humour Ads
If you’re a renter, chances are, you’ve heard or been a part of some truly ridiculous things over the last two or so years. Following the pandemic and nestled right in the middle of the cost of living crisis, the UK has seen some appalling rental terms added onto contracts – unrealistic guarantee agreements, a market that caters itself to the affluent, and people generally being unable to afford accommodation.
Tackling the issue head on, housing charity Shelter enlisted Partizan’s Michael Woodward and Max Barron, otherwise known as Jones, to direct several absurd interactions with bus drivers, park wardens and cafe staff to show just how bizarre these circumstances are. The three different campaign videos ironically show scenarios where having a well paid job, coughing up money months in advance and providing a comprehensive saving history are the only ways to get you into public spaces. The ridiculous nature of the ads show how unrealistic rental standards are, as opposed to other aspects of life, and cry out for a need for real change.
Jones speak to LBB’s Nisna Mahtani about the process of creating each interaction, embedding a dark sense of humour into each spot and using clever framing to highlight the issue even further.
LBB> It’s no secret that the rental market has gone crazy recently, but what made Shelter want to prioritise it in this latest campaign?
Jones> Shelter is trying to put pressure on the government to make the behaviour described in the films illegal, and easily enforceable. There's a piece of legislation going through parliament now called the Renter's Reform Bill, looking at regulating the private rental sector. Shelter sees this as a chance to put an end to various forms of discrimination that certain people find while renting.
It's worth saying that the rental market going crazy (as people reading this might have experienced), is a contributing factor, but what's happening here isn't even that people can't afford to pay - it's that certain types of people who can afford homes are still being denied them for spurious reasons (having kids, getting income support, etc.). The aim of the films is to raise awareness of Shelter's campaign around the RRB and, among other things, put pressure on MPs to give this bill some actual teeth. There are various ways to support them, which you can find on the Shelter website.
LBB> What were your initial thoughts when you saw the brief? How did you want to put your own directorial twist on the storyline?
Jones> Mainly, we felt angry on behalf of the people this happens to. The idea is to use a metaphor to bring the insanity of their situation home to the viewer, which struck us as a smart and effective way to get the message across. Charity ads often fit a very similar template, and this felt like a fresh approach, which is always important when you're trying to raise awareness and get attention.
A lot of our work plays with absurd humour - particularly in the fiction world - and these felt like the kind of scenes we'd have written ourselves for a movie. We wanted to push that absurdity even further, but to make it sort of appallingly recognisable. We all deal with the inhumanity of bureaucracy every day, so we forget how insane it is. By setting that in incredibly trivial situations (taking the bus, buying a coffee) and then dialling it up, we thought we could create both empathy and anger in the viewer.
LBB> We see three very distinct scenarios highlighting the absurdity and double standards that occur when renting as opposed to everyday life. Talk us through the composition of each scene!
Jones> Taking on the project was partly about working out how to deliver as much as possible to the Shelter team on a very limited budget. The three films (a park, a cafe and a bus) had to be kept as simple as possible to be achievable, but we also felt that was the right choice aesthetically. We chose very simple frames that put the human exchange front and centre, because for people to face discrimination, someone has to do the discriminating. So, they're really scenes about people interacting with a system, but the system always has a human face. It would be nice if landlords end up watching the films and thinking again about their own role. After all, a lot of this stuff is already illegal, but people do it anyway, and maybe they don't quite realise what that makes them.
We chose a 4:3 aspect ratio to make the situations feel enclosed and claustrophobic. We wanted the viewer to feel a bit trapped, like the characters. There were various choices there, but at the same time, we didn't want to push the absurdity too far, because these things really do happen and it's important not to lose sight of that.
LBB> The absurdity and discrimination in each scenario are almost laughable. How did you create the balance between reality and fiction as you conveyed the message through dark humour?
Jones> Absurd, dark humour is a big part of our fiction work that can sometimes be hard to bring into advertising (especially the dark part!). So, it was lovely to get a project where that was exactly the requirement.
We do believe in the power of humour to access parts of you that serious things don't, and if you can then use that to make a serious point, it can be really powerful. We always remember the final scene of ‘Blackadder Goes Forth’ where the trenches turn to poppy fields. It's one of the most poignant and moving endings of all time, and it's set up by the fact that you are so open to it because up to then you've been laughing.
Comedy has to be about making people laugh, but there's then a question of what you do with that. Here, we were trying to put it to good use, but as they say, there has to be a balance. It can't become silly, as this isn't a silly subject. You have to sort of respect the boundaries, but within them, dial things up as much as you can.
LBB> Each spot works together to form a cohesive narrative. How did you keep the tone of voice consistent throughout and how did the editing process help with this?
Jones> The tone came from the writing and the film language, which we didn't see the need to alter from one film to the next. The stories are structurally slightly different, but we wanted them to be tied together in that way as a campaign.
For the edit, we worked with the brilliant David Stephens at Assembly Rooms, a long time collaborator who knows our tone well. The big question in the edit was how much 'air' to leave in the films, and where. Absurd humour often benefits from a lot of pauses and off-beats where the audience can take in what's happening, but thinking about where people would see these films, there's also a need to get to the point.
LBB> In terms of timescale, how long did it take to film, edit and release the campaign?
Jones> Luckily we had a bit of time on this one, which as everyone knows is a saving grace when money is tight. It was about a two month process, but we used a lot of that on writing and developing the ideas. Sometimes on ads, you go straight from job award into casting and locations etc., and never have the time to sort of work the idea and find the best version of it. That was a lovely thing about this project - as well as working with the team at Shelter, who were very open to our thoughts, and gave us a lot of creative freedom.
LBB> What was the most challenging part of creating this spot?
Jones> Really only the budget, but even then, when you have the support of the client to make the best films possible, and they're reasonable about trying to understand how that will affect the process, it's not that bad. We've done far more challenging shoots with 10 times this budget and a client who keeps insisting on shooting everything eight different ways, or handing down mandates that make no sense with what we're there to achieve. Luckily at Shelter, there's a lot of experience, including from agency backgrounds. With a different team, the process would have been far more challenging, and in the end, the films would have suffered.
LBB> And the most rewarding?
Jones> The cause. It's always nice to take skills you refined selling fast-moving consumer goods and use them to try to reduce human suffering.
LBB> In one sentence, how would you describe the way in which you wanted viewers to feel when watching the trio of ads?
Jones> As angry as we felt when we first read the scripts!
LBB> So far, how has the audience reacted to the spots?
Jones> They seem to be going down very well, although the real test will be whether they can make a difference to the ‘End Income Discrimination’ campaign.
LBB> What’s next for Shelter? Is there anything else we should keep an eye out for?
Jones> That's above our pay grade, but hopefully, these are successful and they keep doing work like this that's smart and innovative. And hopefully, they ask us to shoot it! Either way, it's been a privilege to be a part of this campaign.
