|
The MSJ posted:Found this on imgur. Pretty clever. I wonder if the ads are real, though. Shame's had some pretty fun adverts: apart from this and the ladies back, I saw one which was just a sheet of reflective foil, with all the details, including the title, in white ink.
|
# ¿ Feb 3, 2012 00:09 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 16:06 |
|
I can't be bothered to track it down right now, but I'll try and get a pic of it tomorrow. It's basically the same principle as when Time Magazine named "You" as Person of the Year, so it's going to be a lot more affecting in person. It's eyecatching and effective, but admittedly told you gently caress all about the film itself.
|
# ¿ Feb 3, 2012 01:47 |
|
Surprised they left DeLillo in the small text, you'd think his name would be a pretty big draw. I guess the rule of three must be maintained. e: whoever designed The Social Network poster must constantly feel they're owed royalties Mr. Squishy fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Mar 22, 2012 |
# ¿ Mar 22, 2012 17:36 |
|
echoplex posted:One way to ensure DVD sales: make it look like a lovely, generic action film. Steven Seagal in Hanna. I'd watch it at least.
|
# ¿ Apr 12, 2012 23:50 |
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:ie not like this Or in the modern Casino Royal's pre-title segment, with a shot of a quickly opened desk drawer containing a gun and also a fancy Sony phone.
|
# ¿ Apr 20, 2012 13:46 |
|
Young Freud posted:Is Viggo Mortensen playing William Burroughs? He and Amy Adams are almost unrecognizable. Yep, or "Old Bull Lee" anyway. But will he be better than Peter Weller? Adams is Joan/"Jane" to boot. Vagabundo posted:I guess we're supposed to immediately recognise the characters or something, but I've never read any Kerouac, so it means nothing to me. Is there any reason to care about this film if you don't like the book? I've heard a lot about it, but it's all boils down to "it's the first film adaptation of this well loved book".
|
# ¿ Apr 21, 2012 14:26 |
|
I almost skipped that film based solely on the crummy poster. It wasn't even that great the first time around. e: I tell a lie, the TV spot which ended with a L4yerCake-ey tits 'n' guns shot didn't help either. I suspect that was in the film solely to take out for advertisements, too Mr. Squishy fucked around with this message at 00:52 on May 2, 2012 |
# ¿ May 2, 2012 00:46 |
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:Let's see. Four Stars from the rag known as the Daily Mail; 'Spectacularly Watchable' seems like such a backhanded compliment from The Times, and generic box cover words from The Sun. It's also a SkyAtlantic DVD and two of the three puffs are from News International Papers. Spectacularly watchable implies you could watch the whole thing through two times over and not even notice. Double-check, you could be watching it right now! Is the square of darker grey around the ring a stylistic choice or a cock-up? It's seem a bit amateurish for such arch posters-are-art folk.
|
# ¿ May 31, 2012 19:10 |
|
Noxville posted:Haven't gotten around to see it yet (it might not have actually finished airing yet, now I think about it) but it's co-written by Paul Abbot who wrote the series State of Play and the UK version of Shameless so I'll definitely get around to it at some point. This sounds rad, why is the first time I'm hearing of it is someone mocking its bland-as-hell box-cover. Seriously, was there any marketing for this at all when it was airing?
|
# ¿ May 31, 2012 19:54 |
|
Suzuki Method posted:Too bad I have no idea if I actually will enjoy Looper since I haven't heard of it until now, but this poster is doing it's job because now I have to see it in order to see if I can justify buying this. The Looper poster basically reads as a high budget Primer, and what do you know, Shane Carruth is linked to the film as some sort of advisor to the time travel effects. God knows what that means, but Looper's director is the guy who did Brick, which I enjoyed, when I could hear the dialogue. So, I'm looking forward to Looper.
|
# ¿ Jun 2, 2012 11:58 |
|
BARONS DEF CHARGER posted:So, uh... That poster is just a hair more monochromatic than the film itself, as this crummy screencap will attest It's always nice to see advert and film sharing an artistic direction.
|
# ¿ Jun 29, 2012 23:04 |
|
FreudianSlippers posted:You misspelled Jonathon Woss. Let's not be abuwist.
|
# ¿ Jul 1, 2012 23:52 |
|
Bane's mask has more detail than would be possible with spray paint and stencil. I'm guessing I'm the only one who cares about that.
|
# ¿ Jul 5, 2012 23:39 |
|
Batman ran through a plate glass window like a looney-toon. Just wait till he realizes there's nothing holding him up!
|
# ¿ Jul 6, 2012 19:46 |
|
He's also got a BBC detective show called Luther which is at 2 seasons with a movie on the way.
|
# ¿ Jul 9, 2012 15:39 |
|
Extreme soft focus. You can't censor two flesh-coloured clouds intersecting. e: or change everything except the title.
|
# ¿ Jul 26, 2012 16:09 |
|
bobkatt013 posted:All those Mitt Romney cartoons? According to the man himself, Larson had an idea of a dog, having finally caught a car, howling in triumph atop it's flipped corpse. Next, in an attempt to be a proper cartoonist, he researched what the underside of a car looks like and drew in a gear-box, bulging out underneath the dog. Then it was published, and he found out he drew a dog loving a car.
|
# ¿ Jul 29, 2012 23:03 |
|
I considered that possibility, but I wasn't sure and it's a good story.
|
# ¿ Jul 29, 2012 23:25 |
|
It's the fim the Rock was destined to make. His whole life makes sense now.
|
# ¿ Sep 20, 2012 15:13 |
|
Poor Jones. First Capote, now this.
|
# ¿ Sep 20, 2012 22:34 |
|
Remember when everyone addressed everyone as gentlemen in all films, ever? Who can forget such lines as "That belongs in a museum gentlemen" or "It's game over gentlemen, game over!", not to mention "gentlemen, your mother sucks cocks in hell!"
Mr. Squishy fucked around with this message at 18:37 on Sep 26, 2012 |
# ¿ Sep 26, 2012 18:35 |
|
I'm pretty sure the first sequel didn't count since long before this. Like, ever since the poster.
|
# ¿ Oct 10, 2012 22:59 |
|
Robert Denby posted:A semi-decent poster that would work a lot better if the title of the movie were on it in some capacity (it's the remake of "Carrie"). I imagine that tagline was meant to be ominous, but it reads teasingly. "Come on, guess who it is. You'll kick yourself when I tell you, you really will."
|
# ¿ Oct 16, 2012 17:57 |
|
You're weirdly offended that they tailor their pandering differently when aiming at a different culture.
|
# ¿ Dec 6, 2012 19:08 |
|
I'm glad we're talking about Kevin, because we've needed to for a while.
|
# ¿ Dec 20, 2012 12:39 |
|
Pointless luxury which leaves you with a headache is the very spirit of the book!
|
# ¿ Dec 21, 2012 18:50 |
|
I was impressed by how very forward-thinking Hitchcock must have been, but then I remembered that bizarre movie. What where they thinking?
|
# ¿ Jan 8, 2013 21:57 |
|
That's your balaclava reference, not Pussy Riot?
|
# ¿ Jan 10, 2013 01:00 |
|
Robert Denby posted:
Did they frankenstein 'sardonic' by patching one quarter 'dopey' onto a 'determined' expression?
|
# ¿ Jan 15, 2013 00:50 |
|
It's cool that the German marketing for TCM1 almost exactly pre-figured that of TCM2. Light, unthreatening family portraiture which alienates the fact that one of them's wearing other people's faces.
|
# ¿ Jan 24, 2013 20:05 |
|
Ceci n'est pas une Franco.
|
# ¿ Feb 7, 2013 13:14 |
|
tliil posted:The great thing about the internet is that people aren't obligated to respond to you! Quit bogarting the correct understanding of Drive dude.
|
# ¿ Feb 8, 2013 01:43 |
|
Is Taxi Driver his only poster which doesn't have every character with a speaking role crammed in there?
|
# ¿ Mar 13, 2013 15:18 |
|
Stare-Out posted:Yeah, that sure looks like a poster for a Star Trek movie. If you removed all the text (except the tagline for added confusion) what movie would that be? Sherlock 2154? Mass Effect 3 after the Reapers are gone? Well the boys in market research have put in some intense testing and found that the key demos think that Stark Trek is "dumb as hell." e: given that's future-london, it would be Sherlock 2154.
|
# ¿ Apr 9, 2013 11:18 |
|
CopywrightMMXI posted:Death Ship looks pretty awesome. And the first one looks like the old WWF logo!
|
# ¿ Apr 16, 2013 14:24 |
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:Prometheus II So Aliens then. e: Alien, that is. Mr. Squishy fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Apr 16, 2013 |
# ¿ Apr 16, 2013 20:39 |
|
If people think there's something wrong with the projection, they shouldn't wait 5 minutes. I mean, they should get the joke anyway but what are you going to do.
|
# ¿ Apr 18, 2013 21:50 |
|
Shoehead posted:To finally push him over the edge? Oh no not again.
|
# ¿ Apr 29, 2013 19:19 |
|
Dissapointed Owl posted:You weren't kidding. This is going to be super uncomfortable. So it'll be a von Triers film?
|
# ¿ May 2, 2013 11:11 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 16:06 |
|
So why does everyone (everyone!) who saw Drive fancy themself to be a graphic designer? How did that happen?
|
# ¿ May 11, 2013 15:49 |