criterionforum.org

The Narrator Returns wrote:Frankly, this day is making me sad. The two titles I want the most, Being John Malkovich and Certified Copy (I don't own the AE), are the ones they screw up. Those covers better be placeholders, because they look like they were designed by a fidgety seven-year-old who was told to experiment with Photoshop.

If you need me, I'll be in the bath having a good cry.

The AE is region-free and would be less than 6 quid with VAT removed. The same doc that's going to be on the Crit is here in 720p. Why the Hell would anyone buy the Crit?

Duh.

Should have gone with the original Malkovich poster art featuring a sea of Malkovich heads on sticks.

Or this:

triodelover wrote:

tarpilot wrote:I'd admit that I'm really looking forward to the inevitable apologists, but I don't think that's going to be an issue this time

What the Hell, I'll try. Wouldn't want to disappoint. At least the two Bergman's use images from the film. The one of Harriet Andersson on the boat is a rather iconic one for Monica. Plus the covers actually represent what's in the case. They are consistent with the most of the rest of Criterion's mainline Bergman (particularly of recent vintage) and they are at least better than the Tartans. OK, that's all I got.

The Bergman's are uninspired, but at least they aren't uninspired and/or terrible in the way CC and BJM are. Nothing really wrong with them, and Monika in particular is, as you note, an iconic shot they almost had to use.

swo17 wrote:Or this:

wow

or this

That is in the same vein as The Dinner With Andre cover art.

Gotta say it: Summer With Monika--best. cover. ever. Swedish? Sex? This should sell a few copies to the uninitiated.

I like the covers.

I think the CERTIFIED COPY cover would have been okay if it used the mirrored statue photograph to more closely replicate the cover of James Miller's book; using a mirrored image of the two leads is too on-the-nose.

this would have worked too:

I think I like the idea of the Malkovich cover, but the execution is pretty awful. The rest I have nothing against, not even Certified Copy.

cdnchris wrote:I think I like the idea of the Malkovich cover, but the execution is pretty awful.

Agreed. If they made it look more like an extreme closeup of Malkovich's actual eye, as opposed to a piece of clip art, and used a different color scheme, the idea could possibly work.

Could the BJM cover be one of those slipcase-things? I seem to recall a couple covers everyone thought looked awful until they got a look at the actual package. It's hard to imagine how this could be saved though, but the artwork is a minor issue compared to the unappealing extras.

This fan cover, with the image based on a poster, would have been great:

Roger Ryan wrote:I think the CERTIFIED COPY cover would have been okay if it used the mirrored statue photograph to more closely replicate the cover of James Miller's book; using a mirrored image of the two leads is too on-the-nose.

That Solaris cover is a stylized version of a scene that actually appears in the film, whereas (what I think Roger may have been implying) the Certified Copy artwork is an obvious and too-literal paraphrasing of what happens in the film.

Yes, that was what I was implying. As to SOLARIS, I guess we could blame Tarkovsky for being too on-the-nose by including a mirror image shot in his film...but, really, with how small the bathrooms are on the space station, shooting into a mirror was the only way to stage the scene adequately.

Aren't they just screwing themselves by having one of the high profile titles in such a crap package? Nobody's going to be in a store and see the Malkovich cover and do a double-take. That blank pail yellow with plain text is horrid. I think it may look better if it were almost any other color and font. If Criterion expects to sell these in stores they are going to have to do a "Life Aquatic" slip cover thing.

How I wish there was a stipulation for the cover of BJM (a la Night of the Hunter or Sweet Smell of Success) where they have to include the actors' likeness or names, forcing them to change the cover. Oh well.

Slightly different art on the sell sheets. Hopefully this is all temporary:

It looks like a shitty Bio 201 textbook. Does this mean it's now totes "brilliant" like the Certified Copy cover once people discovered that it wasn't terrible, it was just copying something that looked terrible which somehow made it a good idea and a good cover via alchemy

Maybe Criterion is taking the "film school in a box" mantra to heart and trying to make their releases look more academic??

Jeff wrote:Slightly different art on the sell sheets. Hopefully this is all temporary

Jesus fucking christ they made it worse! gah!

I would take giant floating heads, or a chimp in a diaper, or the marionettes, or really ANYTHING from the film as a screen cap with basic text over this piece of shit. I'm so annoyed at this release - primarily because it had me really excited but it screams fail on every level.