A new campaign from 1664 pairs global research with a cinematic short film starring Robert Pattinson, using culture, identity, and disagreement to examine why “good taste” remains widely claimed but rarely agreed upon.
1664 is framing “good taste” not as a standard to define, but as a question worth debating. Drawing on global research, the brand highlights a contradiction: while most people believe they possess good taste, far fewer can agree on what that actually means, pointing to a broader cultural tension around identity and self-expression.
The findings suggest that taste has become both deeply personal and highly performative, shaped by everything from fashion and music to online discourse. A significant majority link taste to identity, yet the lack of consensus reveals how fragmented cultural reference points have become in a global, digitally connected world. At the same time, many respondents express hesitation about sharing opinions publicly, reflecting the pressures of social scrutiny and polarized debate.
To bring these ideas into a more tangible form, 1664 turns to storytelling. A Paris-set short film directed by Brady Corbet features Robert Pattinson in three contrasting roles, each representing a distinct interpretation of taste, from minimalist restraint to eccentric maximalism. The narrative unfolds through clashing perspectives, illustrating how confidence in personal taste often coexists with disagreement.
Pattinson’s casting reflects his own career trajectory, which has moved between mainstream visibility and more experimental work. That positioning aligns with the campaign’s central premise: that taste is less about consensus and more about conviction. Rather than resolving the tension, the film leans into it, suggesting that disagreement itself may be part of what defines cultural expression.
The campaign’s broader significance lies in how it reframes a familiar concept. Instead of presenting taste as a marker of status or expertise, it treats it as a reflection of individuality shaped by context, exposure, and personal history. In doing so, 1664 positions the debate not as something to settle, but as an ongoing conversation that mirrors the complexity of modern culture.
By combining research, film, and cultural commentary, the initiative reflects a shift in how brands engage audiences—less through instruction and more through interpretation. In a landscape where identity is increasingly fluid and publicly negotiated, even something as simple as “good taste” becomes a lens for understanding how people define themselves.
