CASE 89 / Snickers / Mars / 2010
You’re Not You When You’re Hungry: Game and Road Trip
A comic change in identity turned a hunger occasion into a repeatable brand story.
AI-assisted research and analysis for the SNS Creative Fieldbook; published by SNS Media Tech. No named human reviewer is claimed.
Sources reviewed 2026-11-05
Campaign credits belong to the original creators. They did not write or endorse this analysis.
Credits: BBDO New York for Mars Chocolate North America. The launch films feature Betty White and Abe Vigoda in Game, with Aretha Franklin in Road Trip.
Recognition: 2011 D&AD Wood Pencil, Film, for the Game / Road Trip television campaign.
Launch / edition: 2010. Award years: 2011.
The problem. The idea. The experience.
The campaign positioned the product around the familiar experience of acting differently when hungry. This is an advertising premise, not a clinical claim about personality.
How the idea came to life
Game used Betty White and Abe Vigoda as comic alter egos in a football setting. Road Trip extended the format with another celebrity performance.
How it reached people
Mars announced the new campaign on 28 January 2010 for a Super Bowl XLIV debut, followed by print, television, cinema and digital work.
Supporting sources: Primary brand release via PR Newswire → Primary award archive →
Read the data in context.
The numbers below describe different kinds of outcomes. Their date, scope and reporting source are part of the result.
The D&AD archive records a 2011 Wood Pencil for the two-film campaign. No sales lift or return figure is claimed from the sources cited here.
The creative mechanism.
An exaggerated before-and-after transformation gives a repeatable reason for the product to appear
Make the product necessary to the story
The product resolves the central situation rather than appearing after an unrelated joke. That gives the audience a reason to connect entertainment with use. In an adaptation, ask whether removing the product leaves the story unchanged; if it does, the brand role may be weak.
Build a flexible structure rather than one famous execution
A clear transformation can accommodate different settings and performers while retaining the same premise. That is how a creative platform differs from a single memorable advertisement. Flexibility still requires fresh observation; changing the celebrity alone can become repetitive.
Celebrity contrast should clarify the mechanism
The performer works because the audience recognizes the mismatch. Without that shared knowledge, the joke may not travel. A smaller brand can use a familiar situation or behavior instead of a famous person, while avoiding stereotypes that make the audience the target of contempt.
An occasion can be more useful than a demographic label
The relevant moment is a need state in which the product might be considered. This can widen creative possibilities without implying that everyone reacts identically. Test whether people remember the occasion and product together, rather than only recalling the celebrity.
The intended behavior loop
- 01Recognize the mismatched behavior
- 02Understand the hunger explanation
- 03See the product resolve the situation
- 04Recall the product in a relevant occasion
Growth job: Connect a familiar need state to the product → build occasion-based memory. This is an interpretation of the mechanism, not an audited attribution model.
A direction to take into the room.
Original editorial interpretation and proposed adaptation. This is a proposed adaptation, not historical campaign execution or a forecast.
The transferable principle
Create a repeatable story in which the product has a clear role at a recognizable occasion.
Keep these boundaries
Do not copy the slogan, celebrity impersonations or scripts. Avoid demeaning portrayals of age, gender or identity.
Turn the lesson into a test.
Illustrative adaptation, not a historical campaign fact
A small-team experiment
A household product team writes three original scenes around one verifiable use occasion.
Build the test
- Describe the problem in ordinary behavior terms.
- Make the product’s role truthful and necessary to the resolution.
- Test whether each scene communicates the same useful idea without explanation.
Measure the right thing
Compare correct occasion and product recall, then investigate qualified interest; do not treat joke recall as purchase intent.
Know when to stop
Reject a scene if the humor depends on an unfair stereotype or implies an unsupported product benefit.
How this reading fits your brief
Start with the useful part.
Best for: Connect a familiar need state to the product → build occasion-based memory
What to adapt: Create a repeatable story in which the product has a clear role at a recognizable occasion.
Prerequisites: A clear product role; Several genuinely different story premises; Appropriate claim substantiation; Cultural review of the humor.
Smaller-team route: Use recognizable situations rather than celebrities to test whether the product and occasion remain connected.
Budget: Not established by the cited sources. No cost-fit claim is made.
Trade-offs and evidence: Read the limits below before choosing a test. There is no guaranteed reach, sales lift or ROAS.
Questions for your next brief
- What specific audience obstacle could an exaggerated before-and-after transformation gives a repeatable reason for the product to appear help address?
- What evidence would distinguish attention from the useful action in this case?
Sources & further reading.
Brand and award-entry results are attributed claims, not independent causal audits. Source links open the original third-party pages.
- Mars: New campaign announcement, 28 January 2010 →Primary brand release via PR Newswire · Supports: Launch timing, named films and performers, agency and planned channel mix.
- D&AD: Snickers TV Campaign, Game / Road Trip →Primary award archive · Supports: Creative mechanism and 2011 Wood Pencil.
Independent educational analysis of external campaigns. These are not SNS client projects, endorsements or claims of involvement. Campaign facts and reported outcomes are attributed to their sources. Explanations, adaptations and test plans are original analysis and hypotheses, not proven causal findings.