please empty your brain below
Spot On!

Tony Goodson | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 3:01 a.m. | #

I love it. Yes I do. (Repeat until sure.)

flashgordonnz | 05.06.07 - 3:12 a.m. | #

It's bloody PINK that's what it is. Oh, and ugly. And I seriously totally failed to realise that it was made up of a '2', '0', '1' and a '2'. Gawd help us...

geofftech | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 4:53 a.m. | #

Without doubt, it is a pile of toss. Thank goodness the official marketing speil/drivel says that it is a dynamic logo - that is hopefully 'dynamic' in the sense that it will change into something better (wouldn't be hard...)

Marc | 05.06.07 - 7:07 a.m. | #

Whilst I enjoyed the post, there is part of me that thinks, "hang on a while". Because there is a chance the logo is worth the money they paid. When realy creative people make something: first you won't have seen it coming and second, they make it look simple.

If the new generations of this image are knockout, they will have achieved two things. More publicity by launching it as a controversial pile of poo and kudos for having done something halfway decent.

So we can look forward to the new versions being displayed first in the Dome by a pink elephant in a tutu.

Ham | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 7:41 a.m. | #

People are certainly talking about it!

Chairwoman | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 7:50 a.m. | #

Well, I like it! Total waste of all that money, but I still like it. It's different from the normal cute grinning animal with a crap name. They should have done the morphing stuff from day one though.

embo | 05.06.07 - 8:44 a.m. | #

I always know what I hate, and I don't hate this!

Spider | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 8:50 a.m. | #

It looks like graffiti "tagging". A load of faux-jollity, worthy of Abigail's Party. Not a moment's contemplation of sport or the quest to excel has gone into it, more like "how can we turn it into a rave-up?". Now we have to have 5 years of dreary sportspeople making dog's dream disco movements without any conviction while it glares and galumphs around.

Feargal Mooney | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 8:52 a.m. | #

I much preferred the one that lost, the word London made out of olympic rings. Can we have that one please?

Debster | 05.06.07 - 8:59 a.m. | #

I am trying to give it time but..... its not going well.

Excellent critique DG.

NiC | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 9:05 a.m. | #

Well now. What *can* I say?

I could have done better with some Helvetica and a bottle of Smirnoff.

** Rushes to find Ken's DDI number **

gimmerugga | 05.06.07 - 9:18 a.m. | #

Excellent DG

Just what was wrong with retaining the original bid logo which we were all used to anyway. This crowd just seem to want to spend our money no matter what.

I understand Ken was left out of the loop on this one and has already said he does not like it!

Barry Arnold | 05.06.07 - 9:25 a.m. | #

Loving the way in which you bulleted the "key elements" in the precise different colours of the logo.

Jag | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 9:33 a.m. | #

it's definitely a picture of someone giving a bloke a blow-job, no doubt about it. but then, have you seen the EU logo celebrating it's 50th 'birthday' ?

zoe | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 10:19 a.m. | #

It took 10 mins before I worked out the funny shapes were the digits 2012. I wondered what the Z had to do with anything.

Essexgirl | 05.06.07 - 10:28 a.m. | #

As I said last week, the Olympics is no longer about sport, it is about people (so-called professionals in various fields) making as much money as possible, for as little as possible, from the bottomless pit that is the Olympic Fund. Off to a good start then.

One has only to look at the Wolff Olins website you link at the beginning to see just how incapble of making an accessible *website* they are.

Blue Witch | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 10:28 a.m. | #

Alternatively, as is suggested on the BBC comments page, it could all be one big wind up to get people to redesign the logo for free. In which case, things could get worse.

Blue Witch | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 10:32 a.m. | #

*cough*

http://www.b3ta.com/board/7255005

Scaryduck | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 10:53 a.m. | #

I wish we had an anti-Olympics candidate to run for Mayor. We could have our say then.

Mobb Faux | 05.06.07 - 11:17 a.m. | #

My word that is ugly! They certainly must have worked hard to find a shape, colour and typeface that are all so horrible.

I don't know if anyone else has pointed this out, but the combination of bright clashing colours and jagged shapes is going to go down especially badly with anyone who suffers from migraine (like me). I couldn't watch the whole of the video that goes with it for fear of triggering an attack. Probably not too good for epileptics, either.

Alyx | 05.06.07 - 11:34 a.m. | #

I quite like it, and I like more and more everytime I see it

Rothko | 05.06.07 - 12:31 p.m. | #

Remember when London won the Olympics and laughed at the silly French? Well now the French are laughing at the silly Stupid English all the way to 2012! I could have tiddled up against a high wall and created a better free flowing design. Get rid and ask some one with real creative flair to design an new logo..I know let's ask the French....

Stewart | 05.06.07 - 1:30 p.m. | #

I'm deeply concerned. Mostly due to DG indelibly burning the image of cartoon characters having sex into what's left of my brain.

Laughing Gear | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 2:28 p.m. | #

As a London-based graphic designer, I'd just like to point out that this amateurish pile of horse vomit is nothing to do with me. Thanks.

Adrian Zmed | 05.06.07 - 2:29 p.m. | #

I agree with Geofftech, why pink? and I didn't get the 2012 bit either. I think my grand-kids could have done better with a pack of felt pens and a sheet of computer paper.

Commuter Tina | 05.06.07 - 2:48 p.m. | #

It's messy and fragmented. Ditch it and buy another.

Feargal Mooney | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 3:51 p.m. | #

money is no object. 7 million cash cows here.

Feargal Mooney | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 3:57 p.m. | #

It reminds me of magazines from the early 80s that were trying very hard to be street. Very very passe I think.

And where are the olympic ring colours? The olympics has a brand of its own already surely.

expensive crap

Harriet | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 6:26 p.m. | #

Kevin's Mum knew it was awful but approved it anyway because she is annoyed that Kevin hasn't visited her recently. She thought if he got the sack because of the design he'd have more time to visit his poor ol' Mum.

Mandy on the otherhand is just thick.

Amused | 05.06.07 - 6:32 p.m. | #

Oh, and .. TISWAS!

http://www.geofftech.co.uk/tiswas.jpg

geofftech | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 7:24 p.m. | #

What is it with all this national moan-in about the logo? Its like everyone just felt like having a cup of tea and a good old moan, all at the same time.

If they came up with a bland logo, you'd be moaning, so they come up with a dynamic refreshing brand, and you're still moaning.

Doubt you could do any better, quite frankly.

Neill | 05.06.07 - 7:41 p.m. | #

I couldn't do any better, but then I failed my Art O level, but I couldn't do much worse.

gareth h | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 8:42 p.m. | #

Agree with Neill - we just have to bloody moan about everything don't we.

embo | 05.06.07 - 9:15 p.m. | #

I think you have an interesting point about the way it will evolve DG - the most cogent theory that I have so far seen.

The problem is that these guys are completely hung up on teasing us, on keeping stuff secret and I find that smugness more annoying than the logo itself.

If they had actually shown the transformation would it really have spoiled the 'surprise'? Maybe but, it might have kept people feeling positive.

It may be a good brand, but the way the PR has been handled has been pants.

Chris | 05.06.07 - 9:39 p.m. | #

"bland logo/dynamic refreshing brand..."

The thing is, once you get drawn in to whether you like it or not, you have been sucked in to the school of idiocy that is THE OLYMPIC GAMES NEEDS A FUCKING LOGO

JonnyB | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 10:01 p.m. | #

What worries me, is what does it say about the people that accepted this - er - er - well, I agree with Adrian Zmed. If they get this so wrong, and at such a cost, what will they do next?

On second thoughts, I'd rather not know.

Temp | 05.06.07 - 10:09 p.m. | #

Not having much luck are they?

Mxx

murphyz | Homepage | 05.06.07 - 10:33 p.m. | #

why take one year of fees when theres the chance for a five year run rate? Fuzzy felt rules!

rashbre | Homepage | 06.06.07 - 12:46 a.m. | #

I've seen much better Graffiti than this - much cheaper too!!

mazz | 06.06.07 - 7:36 a.m. | #

Yes, OBVIOUSLY, the 'brand' has to be strong a different - it doesn't have to be cack.

Adrian Zmed | 06.06.07 - 11:45 a.m. | #

Brand smrand! Since when did the Olympics need a brand makeover? I don't remember such rubbish when I was growing up watching the '68 and '72 Games. Dimwits. F***wits.

Mr. Polite | 07.06.07 - 4:46 a.m. | #

I always quite liked it, and I think, now we're in 2012, it fits perfectly with the branding of today.

Kirk | 28.07.12 - 9:10 a.m. | #











TridentScan v2.10.0 | Privacy Policy