criterionforum.org

Posted: **Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:02 am**

is that for children of men? maybe they thought a translated title sounded too gay and decided to throw a boob on it just for balance?

Posted: **Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:11 am**

This, if an inkling of a trend, bodes really really really really really really really really really really really really well for the future of subbed dvd's.

Keepcase or bra sir?

Posted: **Wed Dec 13, 2006 10:26 am**

It looks like a colorized version of one of Kiki's pink pacifiers from Ray's mastersplat, ETOILE DE MER

Posted: **Wed Dec 13, 2006 11:43 am**

SncDthMnky wrote:is that for children of men? maybe they thought a translated title sounded too gay and decided to throw a boob on it just for balance?

That would make only very slightly less sense than the real thing. (It's for Ilya Khrzhanovsky's 4.)

Posted: **Wed Dec 13, 2006 8:45 pm**

People who buy this film on the basis of that cover are going to be spectacularly disappointed by the age and shape of the breasts on display in it, so in terms subversion, this is probably a 10/10.

Posted: **Wed Dec 13, 2006 9:23 pm**

The Children of Men cover goes far beyond what people have been calling "worst DVD covers ever" in this thread, which has been leaning towards the campy/juvenile side lately. Children of Men belongs in some kind of seperate "DVD Covers of the DAMNED" thread. Great film though.

Posted: **Thu Dec 14, 2006 2:21 am**

On the one hand, I'm glad to see it's finally coming to DVD. On the other, I'm going to be a little ashamed to have something on my shelf that looks like this:

Posted: **Thu Dec 14, 2006 3:20 pm**

Liberace peering down from the heavens. Nice touch!

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 4:14 am**

Crossfire (R-2UK): it's Jane Greer, yes... or no?

They really picked the worst cover art imaginable...

(Source: more worst dvd covers.)

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 5:18 am**

Out of the Past isn't so bad. It reminds me of the R1 La dolce vita cover, which is also inoffensive. When I think of bad covers, I think of this:

JESUS CHRIST

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 6:55 am**

I like the "Out of the Past" cover, I don't see what's wrong with it.

...but that "Muriel" cover ranks with some of the worst on this thread. Somebody on these boards (like SncDthMnky) could probably design a better cover in ten minutes.

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:13 am**

Out of the Past looks good, I don't get it

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:54 am**

This one is hard to beat, at least Bowie got a credit.

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:59 am**

that's a temp image, it means the final font hasn't been configured in time to give to retailers for a title's preorder

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 3:20 pm**

Steven H wrote:When I think of bad covers, I think of this:

[Muriel]

I dunno, I kinda like that cover. It's bold and complex... [a] masterpiece.

Jeez. If the only pull quote you can find is one you have to hack up and mangle with ellipses and brackets, maybe it's just best to forgo a quote entirely.

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 3:51 pm**

domino harvey wrote:that's a temp image, it means the final font hasn't been configured in time to give to retailers for a title's preorder

Here's the final blu-ray artwork. Standard DVD won't be much different I reckon.

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 3:54 pm**

Matt wrote:Jeez. If the only pull quote you can find is one you have to hack up and mangle with ellipses and brackets, maybe it's just best to forgo a quote entirely.

Very true - the original quote could have meant anything. "Bold and complex, but muddled and incomprehensible....any other film compared to this would be [a] masterpiece!"

(Not making a statement about the quality of the film, just backing up Matt's statement on the usefulness of mangled quotes!)

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 4:53 pm**

Matt wrote:
Steven H wrote:When I think of bad covers, I think of this:

[Muriel]
I dunno, I kinda like that cover. It's bold and complex... [a] masterpiece.

Jeez. If the only pull quote you can find is one you have to hack up and mangle with ellipses and brackets, maybe it's just best to forgo a quote entirely.

Yeah, but it's hard to pass up praise from such a source as [the] Seattle Weekly.

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 5:51 pm**

Elliot Stein wrote:A vampish young clotheshorse in Marienbad, Delphine Seyrig is almost unrecognizable in Resnais's bold and complex third feature, Muriel (1963), as a dowdy middle-aged widow attempting to revive an old love affair and incapable of living in the present. The double-stranded narrative (screenplay by poet and novelist Jean Cayrol) also involves her stepson, a veteran of the Algerian war tormented by his participation in the torture and death of a young Arab girl and obsessed with atonement. The director's masterpiece, Muriel is one of the rare French films to concern itself with the war crimes associated with the Algerian conflict. The setting is Boulogne, a town mostly destroyed during World War II and rebuilt in an ugly modern style. Resnais's camera leapfrogs brilliantly: Day and night shots of the same locations are alternated, evoking a ravaged city where everything and everyone seems in a state of flux.

There you go.

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 7:01 pm**

the Prestige, starring Scarlett Johansson as a joint.

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:27 pm**

Posted: **Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:39 pm**

it may not be that attractive... but the Barton Fink cover certainly does not belong in this thread. It does have a nice texture to it, though.

Posted: **Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:39 am**

domino harvey wrote:the Prestige, starring Scarlett Johansson as a joint.

I'd smoke that.

Posted: **Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:31 am**

miless wrote:it may not be that attractive... but the Barton Fink cover certainly does not belong in this thread. It does have a nice texture to it, though.

It just looks a little cheaply done, I guess. Probably not the worst over, granted.

Posted: **Sun Jan 07, 2007 4:23 am**

criterionforum.org

Worst DVD covers... ever!