April 25, 2012
Are London’s 2012 Logos the Worst in Olympic History?

After two years of ridicule, London 2012’s Olympic mascots, “Wenlock and Mandeville,” have at last found some fans. This week, fast food giant McDonald’s announced they would give away nine million free Olympic mascot toys modeled on the unpopular pair at their U.K. outlets, including at a vast temporary 1,500-seater restaurant planned for near the Olympic Park.
Setting aside the question of whether a monster hamburger emporium fits well with a celebration of physical prowess, McDonald’s decision to endorse the Olympic mascots is a rare vote of confidence for the Games’ visual branding. So far, London 2012’s visual identity has been among the worst ever, making this year’s otherwise well-planned games something of a laughing stock. Take those awful mascots, for example. Supposedly modeled on droplets of steel fallen from the stadium, Wenlock and Mandeville’s huge cyclops eyes make them sinister rather than cute. These widely parodied robots are essentially cuddly surveillance cameras. They’ve also been compared to sex toys and even linked to a cult conspiracy theory.
A more serious failure is the Games’ garish dog’s dinner of a logo. A slapdash mess in acid colors, it looks like its designers have accidentally dropped it on the floor, then decided to use the shattered pieces anyway. Modeled on the numbers 2012, it’s so mangled that the Iranians have claimed to see the word “Zion” in it, while bloggers have suggested it resembles something way too crude to print here. So far, no fresh visual success has distracted the public from the logo’s disaster – even Britain’s new Olympic torch looks like a cheese grater.
So why has London 2012’s visual identity been so poor? As Stella McCartney’s kit for the British Olympic team suggests, Britain isn’t without design talent. The shadow that Beijing’s Olympics still casts could be a possible source of London 2012’s visual diffidence, as British organizers have always been aware they could not manage the shock and awe spectacle of China’s 2008 Games.
Read more at The Atlantic Cities. [Image: Reuters]

Hello, nightmare fuel.

Are London’s 2012 Logos the Worst in Olympic History?

After two years of ridicule, London 2012’s Olympic mascots, “Wenlock and Mandeville,” have at last found some fans. This week, fast food giant McDonald’s announced they would give away nine million free Olympic mascot toys modeled on the unpopular pair at their U.K. outlets, including at a vast temporary 1,500-seater restaurant planned for near the Olympic Park.

Setting aside the question of whether a monster hamburger emporium fits well with a celebration of physical prowess, McDonald’s decision to endorse the Olympic mascots is a rare vote of confidence for the Games’ visual branding. So far, London 2012’s visual identity has been among the worst ever, making this year’s otherwise well-planned games something of a laughing stock. Take those awful mascots, for example. Supposedly modeled on droplets of steel fallen from the stadium, Wenlock and Mandeville’s huge cyclops eyes make them sinister rather than cute. These widely parodied robots are essentially cuddly surveillance cameras. They’ve also been compared to sex toys and even linked to a cult conspiracy theory.

A more serious failure is the Games’ garish dog’s dinner of a logo. A slapdash mess in acid colors, it looks like its designers have accidentally dropped it on the floor, then decided to use the shattered pieces anyway. Modeled on the numbers 2012, it’s so mangled that the Iranians have claimed to see the word “Zion” in it, while bloggers have suggested it resembles something way too crude to print here. So far, no fresh visual success has distracted the public from the logo’s disaster – even Britain’s new Olympic torch looks like a cheese grater.

So why has London 2012’s visual identity been so poor? As Stella McCartney’s kit for the British Olympic team suggests, Britain isn’t without design talent. The shadow that Beijing’s Olympics still casts could be a possible source of London 2012’s visual diffidence, as British organizers have always been aware they could not manage the shock and awe spectacle of China’s 2008 Games.

Read more at The Atlantic Cities. [Image: Reuters]

Hello, nightmare fuel.

  1. agence-de-voyage-paris reblogged this from untitled-mag and added:
    Vols + Hotel pour les groupes aux USA pas cher theatlantic:
  2. uscpublicdiplomacy reblogged this from theatlantic and added:
    Whoever designed these was likely watching a lot of Doctor Who at the time!
  3. embracetherevolutions reblogged this from theatlantic
  4. theamericanscholar reblogged this from theatlantic and added:
    These guys are pretty bizarre. Is it a sign of bad things to come for London 2012?
  5. graifox reblogged this from dani912
  6. andwerolloureyes reblogged this from theatlantic
  7. politicalthinker2099 reblogged this from untitled-mag
  8. asinglepickledegg reblogged this from the-den and added:
    "A possible source of London 2012’s visual diffidence, as British organizers have always been aware they could not...
  9. dani912 reblogged this from untitled-mag
  10. untitled-mag reblogged this from theatlantic
  11. enoisquevoa96 reblogged this from my-life-is-all-you
  12. fifthconundrum reblogged this from sunfell and added:
    Can someone please explain what the HELL this is??????? This makes no sense to my eyes and has nothing at all to do with...
  13. worclip reblogged this from reuters
  14. wizardblue reblogged this from reuters
  15. giovanni-for-team-rocket reblogged this from journo-geekery
  16. sassational reblogged this from journo-geekery and added:
    Are London’s 2012 Mascots the Worst...Olympic History?
  17. sincerelymymy reblogged this from journo-geekery
  18. journo-geekery reblogged this from theatlantic and added:
    This has little to do with tech beyond another great example of internet culture making something bad just a bit more...
  19. chalkdustswirls reblogged this from theatlantic and added:
    I’m pretty sure “Izzy” marks the point where Olympic mascots went awry. It makes the top 5 for worst things associated...
  20. insipidrhymes reblogged this from theatlantic and added:
    HAHA ARE THOSE REALLY THE MASCOTS?
  21. pornwhore reblogged this from reuters
  22. autisticequiuszahhak reblogged this from laughterkey
  23. wingedness reblogged this from quasarden and added:
    … Welp. I guess I have job security.
  24. giveupordie reblogged this from theatlantic
  25. weejit reblogged this from theatlantic and added:
    Yes. Yes, they are.
  26. catedrals reblogged this from reuters and added:
    holy GOD what is that
  27. my-life-is-all-you reblogged this from theatlantic
  28. rhm2k reblogged this from theatlantic and added:
    The answer to this question is an unqualified: Yes. They are. Nightmares.