Me: Do you understand how advertising works? It's supposed to invoke a feeling. There are a number people who found this uncomfortable viewing. There is zero joy in it, little dialogue that indicates anyone is having a nice time, a father who looks miserable and impatient until he puts on his record, children who look apprehensive.
You: Except that’s a massive misreading. None of that is in the advert.
Saying you don’t like it is an opinion and obviously valid. Misreading it is something else. Especially when it’s blindingly obvious that’s not what is intended.
Operative words: None of that is in the advert. Which is why I listed what is going on in the advert and the behaviours I observed. Including the parts where they are smiling and talking.
You claim I can't possibly see any of the negativity because it is a Christmas ad so "that's not what was intended". I assume you mean that, knowing it's a Christmas ad, I must be prejudiced in favour of it being a positive depiction. The flaw in that line being that, watching it cold, nobody knows that it's an ad for John Lewis, let alone a "Christmas ad" until they get to the end of it.
The advert's long lead up to the final scene has to have a point. The point being that the JL present re-ignites a connection between father and son that has been lost. To do that there had to be a distance in the first place. The expressions and behaviour up until the end serve the purpose of creating a picture of disconnect/nervousness/melancholy. These are not neutral expressions. They are setting up a picture that is definitely not joy.