criterionforum.org

Cinephrenic wrote:I wish they changed the Gimme Shelter cover art.

They probably feel they can't since a "name" illustrator created that image, but I think it's one of the ugliest and least characteristic things Frank Kozik has ever done. But a grainy blow-up of a 16mm frame enlargement would be so awesome (and actually very fitting) for this movie.

Saturnome wrote:They removed them from the website for now, but I saved them!

Some more salvaged Kurosawa covers:

Matt wrote:

Cinephrenic wrote:I wish they changed the Gimme Shelter cover art.

They probably feel they can't since a "name" illustrator created that image, but I think it's one of the ugliest and least characteristic things Frank Kozik has ever done. But a grainy blow-up of a 16mm frame enlargement would be so awesome (and actually very fitting) for this movie.

Unless it's, you know, the blow-up the Maysles create for Jagger in the film . . .

Here's the full sized Rashomon cover art.
[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/release_images/2488/AK_Rashomon.jpg[/img]

and some more...
[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/811/AK_SanshiroSugata.jpg[/img]

[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/814/AK_SanshiroSugata2.jpg[/img]

[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/817/AK_MenWhoTread.jpg[/img]

[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/820/AK_Madadayo.jpg[/img]

[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/823/AK_MostBeautiful.jpg[/img]

[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/828/AK_Scandal.jpg[/img]

[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/831/AK_LiveInFear.jpg[/img]

[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/834/AK_Kagemusha.jpg[/img]

I thought those big letters would be spelling out some secret message if assembled in the right order, but they seem to be just big capital letters for the titles, or a word in the titles ('M' for Madadayo; 'F' for Fear, 'B' for Beautiful). Am I missing something, or is this sort of dumb?

I like the stylised seal with date, however.

Matt wrote:

Cinephrenic wrote:I wish they changed the Gimme Shelter cover art.

They probably feel they can't since a "name" illustrator created that image, but I think it's one of the ugliest and least characteristic things Frank Kozik has ever done. But a grainy blow-up of a 16mm frame enlargement would be so awesome (and actually very fitting) for this movie.

I'm no fan of FK to begin with nor the whole culture associated with his stupid designer toys and skateboard art crap, but that cover was always one of the worst!

I never even knew who the artist was until you posted it, but why the hell would they even comission him for a project like this? I was really hoping for something much better for the BD, a still or anything. The original theatrical sheet was so cool too with the silhouette of the Stones on stage. I'm sure they could've done something really neat with that. And dig this alternate sheet; that would've been so boss!

Anyways, the Criterion Gimme Shelter has always looked like puke and the new BD is uber lazy and looks like crap. What stupid marketing for a new version too. Anyone know if a new SD reissue from a new master is coming as well??

Wow, is it just me or are these the most embarassingly ugly covers in the [occasionally embarassing] history of Criterion? How hideous...

On the main site, they have replaced the old Eclipse covers on the Postwar Kurosawa page with the new AK covers.

[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/release_images/2497/Kurosawaset.jpg[/img]

what's the title of the one with the guy holding the umbrella, and the yellow tint? From kurosawa

Here are all the hi-res images of the covers from the AK100 set:




[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/864/AK_WonderfulSunday.jpg[/img][img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/879/AK_StrayDog.jpg[/img][img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/867/AK_Rashomon.jpg[/img]


[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/888/AK_Ikiru.jpg[/img][img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/831/AK_LiveInFear.jpg[/img]
[img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/914/AK_LowerDepths.jpg[/img][img]http://criterion_production.s3.amazonaws.com/product_images/849/AK_BadSleep.jpg[/img]

hmmm... not quite sure what to make of those. Some of them are good (the white ones) but the blue and yellow ones are awfull...

The stills themselves are fine, but the tinting is just bad. I also wish they were all vertically uniform instead of some being flipped sideways. To be honest, I really just prefer all of the original Criterion covers.

The original Throne of Blood cover is one of the best ones Criterion ever did.

Like the simplicity of cover design and most aspects of what we are currently privy to thus far for the big K set (the image of the box and its contents, and the individual covers).

The problem with what appears to be the top of the whole affair, but is used at CC's site as the cover, is that if it really is opened as a shoe box, then it is a very awkward big ol' thing to store. At least the Janus set and the (difficult to open and books a flyin' everywhere) Murnau/Borzage sets were more easily storable coffee table book-like affairs.

The individual covers are a great idea and at least Hidden Fortress and Drunken Angel use the correct intensity level for the color and image. Ikiru, Throne of Blood and No Regrets For Our Youth are really nicely designed, they just need both their color and image amped up. The rest will all look better with similar color and image levels changes.

Despite the possible problem with the boxy thing instead of a big ol' book and the current great variation in the individual cover intensity it seems like a really modern, simple, and Japanesey looking coherent design. Really like the little stamp that, along with the font tie the whole cover bit together.

It is alway slightly hasty to judge a cover by its thumbnail - it may be more a problem in scanning than what will actually be reproduced. Remember that when Last Year was first announced some couldn't even read it on their monitors.

However ... I certainly thought they would revisit the cover of the Stones BR. That cover is perhaps one of their most unsightly covers ever, so it is really disappointing they didn't take this opportunity to correct it!

They haven't "revisited" their covers for any of the Blu-ray upgrades, only those that accompanied complete reissues. This helps to signify that you are basically getting the same package as before, just in higher definition. Makes sense to me.

I'm assuming that with the push back of release dates due to packaging issues that the replacement of the original digipaks is also going to be pushed back, though this is just speculation on my part. Anyone hear anything in regards to this?

Eric Skillman explains what happened with the White Dog cover.

Matt wrote:Eric Skillman explains what happened with the White Dog cover.

But then it turned out that there were some legal issues that limited the size of the title treatment (specifically, the size of the credit block on the back cover had to be a certain percentage of the title treatment, which would have taken up literally the entire back cover if we'd sized it according to the title on our cover of choice, which meant, in effect, that the title treatment had to be shrunk down to accommodate the credit block.)

Can someone explain to me what this is all about?

That's an interesting tidbit, watching White Dog with the chroma turned down. I'll be trying that tonight.

Can someone explain to me what this is all about?

The agreement they had with the rights holder (probably) stated that the credit block on the back of the DVD had to be a certain percentage of what the title was on the front. So, the bigger the front title, the bigger the credit block had to be. At the size the title was on the original cover, the credit block would have had to fill the page. To avoid this, they had to reduce the size of the title on the front cover, which led to them having to change the cover entirely, for aesthetic reasons.

Napier wrote:That's an interesting tidbit, watching White Dog with the chroma turned down. I'll be trying that tonight.

I can't imagine there being any way to save this film or make it watchable.

aox wrote:

Napier wrote:That's an interesting tidbit, watching White Dog with the chroma turned down. I'll be trying that tonight.

I can't imagine there being any way to save this film or make it watchable.

I actually didn't find White Dog all that bad. After all, it was the eighties.

Concerning AK100: The Digital Bits has fotos of a mock-up of the complete box.