Forum

I take on board the point about the logo coming to life as an animation - but I suppose if any logo is turned into an animated format  it can possibly bring another dimension to how it is interpreted.   The '2012 Brand' - not just the logo or picture of the brand - but the values and messages associated with the logo - is all about energy, life, sport, movement, speed, noise, excitement, daring, courage, pushing the boundries of endurance etc - and the animated films for the brand are communicating this effectively.   Which then leaves the 'icon'  or logo far more palatable, as the viewer is able to identify the 'icon' with the 'values' associated with it.   Brand values are held in the hearts and minds of those that 'touch' the brand, therefore, the role of the advertising agency behind the 2012 brand is to ensure that they communicate these and build the right values over time. 

Good basic logo design dictates that the logo works across many platforms;  offline, online, animated, large scale, small scale - and ideally, it stands on its own as a composition.  Therefore, from a design perspective perhaps the way the agency went about 'launching' the logo to the world was their main downfall.  Think about the way 'orange' did things.  They started an ad campaign for their own brand - to build interest in who they were - what was this 'odd' orange square appearing everywhere with no message - what did it mean.   My criticism is not with the 2012 'logo' - albeit I think there are better graffiti fonts out there than the one they used - but is more to do with the way in which they 'marketed' the brand initially -  (I recall the news report focusing on the controversy about the cost,  and nobody being clear on what it meant or stood for).  Or perhaps that was the agency's strategy!  After all, it's keeping the conversation going...