Criterion Cover Art & Packaging Babble-on Vol.2

Message

godardslave · #126 Post by **godardslave** » Mon May 02, 2005 6:52 pm

gate of flesh: awesome.
white nights: very good.
unfaithfully yours: weak.

that is all.

justeleblanc · #127 Post by **justeleblanc** » Mon May 02, 2005 7:35 pm

godardslave wrote:unfaithfully yours: weak.

I completely disagree. I think it's maybe the best Sturges cover yet, af all titles Region 1 & 2.

Jun-Dai · #128 Post by **Jun-Dai** » Mon May 02, 2005 8:03 pm

You really prefer the cover to Unfaithfully Yours over that of Sullivan's Travels? I'm pretty much in agreement with godardslave wrt this month's cover art (so far).

Steven H · #129 Post by **Steven H** » Mon May 02, 2005 8:14 pm

That Unfaithfully Yours cover is awful. I would rather have had this.

Dudley Moore with a knife. If that's not comedy, I don't know what is.

justeleblanc · #130 Post by **justeleblanc** » Mon May 02, 2005 8:25 pm

Jun-Dai wrote:You really prefer the cover to Unfaithfully Yours over that of Sullivan's Travels? I'm pretty much in agreement with godardslave wrt this month's cover art (so far).

Sullivan is fine, but I think the Unfaithfully Yours cover does a fantastic job emulating the charm of the film and the mild silliness, i don't know dude, it just works for me.

Sullivan's cover is a little too art deco for me, and Lady Eve is too busy.

You know what it is though? It's like a silk screen t-shirt that says "9th Annual Mother's Day Picnic," like a cheaply made t-shirt that costs 20 dollars only because its to help raise money for a new auditorium. Regardless, UY is so much better.... it's like a Christmas card from Rex himself.

yumitree · #131 Post by **yumitree** » Tue May 03, 2005 6:40 am

you know what bugs me about the unfaithfully yours cover? the fucking grunge edges... did they set their time machine to 2000 to find designers for this cover?

i think the next cover will have 45 degree arrows, 3d starbursts or gradient backdrops.

justeleblanc · #132 Post by **justeleblanc** » Wed May 04, 2005 5:40 am

So the word is that Criterion wanted a June release date for Heaven Can Wait, but that Fox didn't give them the rights until recently. They had less time to work on it than they wanted, so the cover was rushed and looks like a bad middle-school drawing.

Does anyone know who drew it?

justeleblanc · #133 Post by **justeleblanc** » Wed May 04, 2005 3:13 pm

Appearantly they wanted a June date since that's the big wedding month, and the special features on the disc are June related as well.

This is also why they didn't have time to get a commentary.

Lino · #134 Post by **Lino** » Wed May 11, 2005 3:51 pm

justeleblanc · #135 Post by **justeleblanc** » Wed May 11, 2005 5:03 pm

Damn that's a great cover. I wonder if there's a way to poll how many people blind buy certain Criterion discs over others simply because of their covers.

the dancing kid · Wed May 11, 2005 6:08 pm

I agree, that's a really beautiful cover. It fits with the film very well.

souvenir · #137 Post by **souvenir** » Wed May 11, 2005 6:14 pm

Criterion has it up now, slightly different from the dvdempire cover:

javelin · #138 Post by **javelin** » Wed May 11, 2005 6:34 pm

i like the dvd empire cover better, I think. Although it seems very much in the vein of Ozu, so I can see why they'd change it.

Nihonophile · #139 Post by **Nihonophile** » Wed May 11, 2005 10:20 pm

Its too Ozu plus I like the real cover because it looks like a front cover for a novel.

Hrossa · #140 Post by **Hrossa** » Thu May 12, 2005 12:25 am

Wow, well I think this one is much better than the Gate of Flesh cover. So much for hoping they'd be consistent stylistically. I think the only thing the two of them have in common is the title font. I think it's my second favorite Suzuki cover after Youth of the Beast.

One question: Why the border? I don't see any reason for having it.

mmiesner · #141 Post by **mmiesner** » Thu May 12, 2005 1:45 am

i too was wondering about the single width of the double discer... i can only think of two others like that (down by law and tanner 88), are there more? i have always wondered how they decide to use alternate packaging on some of their sets, like the horrendous disc set up inside the 'in the mood for love' set or the single width double disc sets, or how some box sets have the slimline cases and some have full cases. i just don't understand the inconsistencies.

godardslave · #142 Post by **godardslave** » Thu May 12, 2005 1:48 am

double width boxes are bulky and take up a lot of space on the shelf.

Many more single width [prefrerably digipack] double disc editions would be much preferable for me.

mbalson · #143 Post by **mbalson** » Thu May 12, 2005 1:49 am

like the horrendous disc set up inside the 'in the mood for love' set

Which was? It had a large book, but everything about the package seemed pretty normal to me.

daniel p · #144 Post by **daniel p** » Thu May 12, 2005 2:14 am

godardslave wrote:double width boxes are bulky and take up a lot of space on the shelf.

Many more single width [prefrerably digipack] double disc editions would be much preferable for me.

I'm actually a sucker for the double width cases... even though they take up the extra shelf space, they look great imo...

mmiesner · #145 Post by **mmiesner** » Thu May 12, 2005 2:52 am

as far as the choice of double width over single... i can go either way. i seem to like the look of the double wides, but the lack of space i have makes me happy for some of the single wides... so, there you have it.

the 'In the Mood for Love' set has the most bizarre and unnecessary packaging i have ever seen. it is double wide, but with only one opening, similar to Herzog's 'Nosferatu' and Langs 'Dr Mabuse the Gambler'. but when you open the damn thing up, the discs are stacked on top of eachother, and have about 8 VERY TIGHT tabs holding the discs in. so essentially, if you want to check out the second disc, you have to take the first one out, and the tabs are so tight and there are so many that you can't possibly push them all in, making it very tough to remove the discs. the first time i took each disc out, i broke so many of the tabs that now the discs don't stay in the holders. grrrrr... am i the only one with this case or problem?

godardslave · #146 Post by **godardslave** » Thu May 12, 2005 3:36 am

sound like you have a [very] weird case, where did you buy it from?

my in the mood for love double case is just like all the other criterions double width cases.

mmiesner · #147 Post by **mmiesner** » Thu May 12, 2005 12:31 pm

well that really sucks, i bought the damn thing from barnes and noble. grrrrr i always figured this was the standard since i bought it from a reputable place...

man... i don't know what i'm going to do!

i think i'll be fine, i just think that's weird. and now i'm jealous that you guys all have better boxes than mine.

Sai · #148 Post by **Sai** » Thu May 12, 2005 3:34 pm

Yea, I heard about those strange boxes of In the Mood for Love. Saw one going for $180 on e-Bay last week.

#149 Post by **cdnchris** » Thu May 12, 2005 5:16 pm

I thought they moved to those different cases for In the Mood For Love because the booklet was so thick it fucked up the regular cases (I know it fucked up mine, I can't even close it.) I wish they used them for Kagemusha. It's not as thick as ITMFL, but it's close.

Lemdog · #150 Post by **Lemdog** » Thu May 12, 2005 6:12 pm

Can you post some pictures of your In the Mood for Love case? That is the weirdest thing I've ever heard of.

Internal Resources

External Sites

Specialty Labels

Site Menu

Criterion Cover Art & Packaging Babble-on Vol.2