Toys R Us
AI-generated video advertising
In June 2024, Toys R Us unveiled at Cannes a brand film generated mainly with OpenAI's Sora; brand sentiment fell to 3.4% positive against 53.4% negative after airing.
Objective
Get the brand talked about with a film honoring its founder Charles Lazarus, positioning itself as a pioneer of AI video production.
The deployment
In June 2024, Toys R Us presented at the Cannes Lions festival a brand film of about 66 seconds made mainly with Sora, OpenAI's video generation tool. The spot tells the childhood of Charles Lazarus and the dream said to have inspired the brand and its giraffe mascot. The rendering carries the typical markers of the generative: the child changes appearance from shot to shot, the texture is smooth and artificial. The reaction from the creative community and the public was immediate and hostile, the ad being called soulless. The brand defended the choice rather than pulling the film.
Results Proof C
Established press (Forbes, eMarketer) and a sentiment-measurement tool (Marketing-Interactive) report the brand, the tool, and the response from its marketing leadership by name. No financial or legal document, hence C.
How it works
Inferred typical approachThe internal detail is not public. Here is a proven approach that leads to the same result, to adapt to your stack.
The stack in detail
- llm OpenAI Sora OpenAI's text-to-video model used to generate most of the film's shots; in 2024, it did not hold a character's consistency between shots.
- plateforme OpenAI The publisher of the Sora model used to produce the brand film.
- outil Post-production humaine Editing, music, and corrections done by the creative team; tools not publicly named.
Post-mortem
GraveyardWhat happened sourced
In June 2024, Toys R Us unveiled at Cannes a brand film produced mainly with Sora. The spot is conceived as a tribute to founder Charles Lazarus. From the moment it aired, creatives and internet users attacked the artificial rendering and the choice not to bring in professionals. The brand's sentiment measurement flipped from neutral to negative within days. The brand kept the film and defended its technology bet.
Reason for failure sourced
The rejection comes from two documented things: an inconsistent visual rendering (the child changes look between shots, the smooth texture typical of the generative) and a principled rejection by the creative community of an ad that replaces human work with AI. The very subject of the spot, a child's limitless imagination, made the contrast with a machine rendering even more poorly received.
Cost sourced
Reputational cost: a measured swing of sentiment to the negative, unfavorable international press coverage. No direct financial cost published.
Warning signs inferred
Inferred: in 2024 the Sora tool did not hold a character's consistency across multiple shots, which was already known to technical teams. Airing a rendering carrying the visible artifacts of the generative, on an emotional subject, before an audience of creatives at Cannes, stacked the conditions for rejection.
Lessons in hindsight inferred
Inferred: AI video generation can serve in production (previsualization, moodboards, filler shots) without being exposed raw as the final film of a major brand. The 2024 public judges harshly an ad that shows its AI seams on emotional content. A discreet, controlled use is better than a communication stunt about having generated everything.
Inferred: yes, the AI-generated video pattern remains valid and is advancing fast. The failure condemns this execution (unpolished 2024 rendering, poorly chosen subject, foregrounding the process), not the category. The reception question is moving: what shocked in 2024 will be judged differently as quality rises and the use becomes commonplace.
How your customers perceive this type of use
Sourced studiesUn ecart net separe les annonceurs des consommateurs : 77% des annonceurs voient l'IA positivement contre 38% des consommateurs (Yahoo/Publicis, 2024). Les mesures implicites confirment le rejet declare : en EEG, les pubs generees par IA produisent une activation memorielle plus faible que les pubs traditionnelles et sont decrites comme agacantes, ennuyeuses et confuses (NIQ, 2024). La disclosure a un effet ambivalent : elle augmente fortement la confiance quand elle est remarquee (Yahoo/Publicis), mais 27% des jeunes consommateurs disent faire moins confiance a une entreprise dont la pub est creee par IA (IAB, 2024).
Acceptance conditions
- Une disclosure visible : quand la mention IA est remarquee, la confiance globale envers l'entreprise augmente de 96% (Yahoo/Publicis 2024)
- Une qualite visuelle suffisante : les visuels IA de basse qualite augmentent l'effort cognitif et distraient du message (NIQ 2024)
Red lines
- Le contenu IA non declare puis identifie : 72% des consommateurs disent que l'IA rend l'authenticite difficile a etablir (Yahoo/Publicis 2024) et les marques utilisant des pubs IA sont plus souvent jugees inauthentiques ou non ethiques par les consommateurs que par les dirigeants (IAB 2024)
- Les mannequins et personnes generes par IA : 46% des consommateurs n'en veulent pas dans la publicite, l'inquietude premiere etant les standards de beaute irrealistes (Attest 2025)
Sources: Yahoo / Publicis Media (terrain Ebco) 2024 · IAB (avec Attest) 2024 · NIQ (NielsenIQ) 2024 · Attest 2025
How to replicate
Inference, not sourcedData prerequisites
- creative brief
- style references
- iterated prompts
Org prerequisites
- human art direction
- quality control of the rendering before airing
Possible stack
- a text-to-video tool
- an editing suite
- an internal creative review
First step: Define where AI video really serves (previz, filler shots) and decide upfront whether the final rendering can withstand being exposed raw to the target audience.
Sources
- S1 The Toys 'R' Us AI-Generated Ad Controversy, Explained Established press archive pending
- S2 Toys R Us unveils ad made with Sora AI video tool, prompting criticism Established press archive pending
- S3 Toys R Us sees sentiments plummet over 'soulless' AI-generated ad Secondary archive pending
An error, newer info, a source?
This page lives on its accuracy. If a figure has moved, if the deployment has changed, or if you have a higher-quality source, tell us. Every sourced correction is verified before publication.