Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

Discuss North American DVDs, Blu-rays, UHDs, and related topics
Locked
Message
Author
User avatar
SpiderBaby
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:34 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1326 Post by SpiderBaby »

ha, 4 people, 3 names.
User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1327 Post by swo17 »

*CG* wrote:ha, 4 people, 3 names.
I think you're forgetting Peter Travers, a guy who saw the movie.
User avatar
SpiderBaby
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:34 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1328 Post by SpiderBaby »

swo17 wrote:
*CG* wrote:ha, 4 people, 3 names.
I think you're forgetting Peter Travers, a guy who saw the movie.
His name is more important. When the public picks up a movie that has Matt Damon and Jeff Bridges on the cover, they don't say "Hey, who is that no-name girl?", but rather "What does Rolling Stone Mag have to say about this flick?".
User avatar
eerik
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:53 pm
Location: Estonia

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1329 Post by eerik »

User avatar
aox
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:02 pm
Location: nYc

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1330 Post by aox »

Image
User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:49 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1331 Post by knives »

You made a mistake, that belongs in the awesome cover thread.
User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:25 pm
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1332 Post by swo17 »

You know that's actually true to the film, right?
User avatar
aox
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:02 pm
Location: nYc

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1333 Post by aox »

I was only in this thread to get directions on how to get away from this thread to the awesome covers thread. :oops:
User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:49 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1334 Post by knives »

I do love how it's all decapitations though. Were they just lying down or did the tire jump up to kill them?
User avatar
Murdoch
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:59 am
Location: Upstate NY

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1335 Post by Murdoch »

And there's a straight track, so the bodies, after lying down with their heads lined up, managed to crawl a few feet decapitated before giving out. If anything that would be a disturbing scene.
User avatar
SpiderBaby
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:34 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1336 Post by SpiderBaby »

How many "killer TYRE" films are there to be the best?
User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 6:42 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1337 Post by domino harvey »

The tire has psychic abilities and makes their heads explode Scanners-style. No, really
User avatar
aox
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:02 pm
Location: nYc

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1338 Post by aox »

is this something I need to see? I still haven't even bothered to watch Snakes on a Plane. The only thing significant, to me, about Rubber is that it was shot entirely on a Canon 5DMarkII.
Ishmael
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 6:56 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1339 Post by Ishmael »

Here's the Rubber trailer. Not that it answers any of the perplexing issues that have been raised so far.
User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 11:24 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1340 Post by zedz »

Rubber, for better or worse, is an art film masquerading as a ridiculous high-concept exploitation movie - plenty of half-baked film theory and self-reflexive conceits waiting in the wings. That cover is part of the joke. It's relatively amusing, but it's basically a short film that overstays its welcome and hasn't figured out how to pad itself out to feature length.

Yes I have even seen Rubber
User avatar
Lemmy Caution
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:26 am
Location: East of Shanghai

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1341 Post by Lemmy Caution »

"Into the car of your eyes" is rather poetic.
And many sentences would be improved by adding "and zinc" at the end.
At least I think so, and zinc.
User avatar
manicsounds
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 2:58 am
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1342 Post by manicsounds »

And if you didn't know, Quentin Dupieux is also known as Mr. Oizo
User avatar
Kirkinson
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:34 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1343 Post by Kirkinson »

Zedz has it right. It's fun for a while, but by the time it reaches the half-hour mark Rubber seems to lose interest in its own opening thesis statement and becomes about as conventional as a killer tire movie could be. It does start off pretty strong, though.
aox wrote:is this something I need to see? I still haven't even bothered to watch Snakes on a Plane. The only thing significant, to me, about Rubber is that it was shot entirely on a Canon 5DMarkII.
It was interesting to see it in a theatre projected on 35mm and observing that, aside from peculiarities about the way it was shot, the DSLR footage held up really well to the conversion. But those peculiarities get kind of annoying after a while, as nearly every shot has hair's-breadth focus and most of the handheld work succumbs to some of the worst rolling-shutter wobble I've seen (which is especially annoying on a huge movie screen). This all may have been intentional for all I know*, but I don't think it worked either way. So, if the 5D element interests you, I'd say it might be worth it if you're sure you're going to see it on 35mm and you're interested in how that will look. But if you're just going to watch it on Blu-ray at home and you're not really interested in the content of the movie itself, you're probably better off renting last year's season finale of "House."

(*In fact, it had to be intentional on some level. Since most of the movie takes place in bright sunlight, they could have easily shot around f16 and achieved greater depth. Instead, it looks like they shot at the widest aperture possible, probably with an ND filter, and then cranked up the shutter speed, which also emphasizes the wobble. Maybe the image is supposed to look "rubbery"? In any case, I think Rubber actually exemplifies some of the worst working methods for DSLR cinema, especially for the 5D, which already has shallower depth of field than any of its siblings.)
User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 8:43 pm
Location: Miami, FL

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1344 Post by mfunk9786 »

Image
User avatar
Cash Flagg
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:15 am

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1345 Post by Cash Flagg »

Where are they, exactly?
User avatar
ccfixx
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:37 am
Location: Rhode Island, USA

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1346 Post by ccfixx »

Those look like actual women, albeit not too attractive, to me rather than two men dressed as women.
User avatar
Murdoch
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:59 am
Location: Upstate NY

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1347 Post by Murdoch »

Image

Monroe's left arm looks like it's been amputated.
User avatar
Alphonse Doinel
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 4:42 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1348 Post by Alphonse Doinel »

Image
User avatar
Brian C
I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 3:58 pm
Location: Northwest US

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1349 Post by Brian C »

I can't tell if this is the source for all three faces or just Marilyn's. Ghastly photoshop either way, obviously.

ImageImage
User avatar
perkizitore
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: OOP is the only answer

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#1350 Post by perkizitore »

Olive Films is a repeat offender
Image
Locked