Page 35 of 67
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:04 am
by domino harvey
they are probably testing the waters to test early reactions... so, hello Criterion Executives, this is what backfiring looks like.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:30 am
by Cinesimilitude
justeleblanc wrote:Also...... any chances of giving the lady on the cover a Samourai hat?
two birds...
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:46 am
by Noir of the Night
The only thing that could improve that would be to find a way to work in the talking gorilla.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:09 am
by bunuelian
I was thinking the Viridiana/King of Kings "saint beams" would be nice, but that'll do, pig, that'll do.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:15 am
by Cinesimilitude
Noir of the Night wrote:The only thing that could improve that would be to find a way to work in the talking gorilla.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 6:09 am
by godardslave
hehe, nice one again SncDthMnky, your really good at those fake covers. i think you have found your calling in life! =D>
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 12:07 pm
by Narshty
In the cold light of day, Sheila Sim simply looks as if she's got leprosy.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 12:47 pm
by hammock
I'm still in shock - how could they do it?
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:41 pm
by toiletduck!
I know I'm fekkin' slow, but goddamn, this and the deadly 1-2-3 punch of pzman84, godardslave, and domino harvey that swiftly followed made milk shoot out my nose, and I wasn't even drinking milk!
-Toilet Dcuk
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:55 pm
by Lemdog
I like to think the person in charge of that cover is currently looking at the forum and crying at what has occured. I'm still laughing at that thing.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:37 pm
by domino harvey
cut them some slack, freshman year of high school can be very stressful!
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:44 pm
by Jem
domino harvey wrote:wow, what a colossal mistake this new move is. without the Criterion Logo, I'm sorry, but what differentiates this from a Fox Lorber box? horrible.
I can't see any reason why they would not put the Criterion logo (whatever that may be) on the front cover. I would suggest they will.
Apart from that, the Canterbury Tale cover is high kitsch, along the lines of:
My feeling is it goes too far, people won't get it, though a brave/insane attemp.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:46 pm
by Matt
Frankly, that hat/gorilla cover is a vast improvement over the original.
I felt a little bad criticizing the original
Viridiana cover so harshly because it wasn't inept so much as it was just inappropriate for the film. I would have no problem telling the painter of this cover, however, that whatever
Art Instruction School degree they have is not worth the paper it's printed on.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:48 pm
by Matt
Jem wrote:Apart from that, the Canterbury Tale cover is high kitsch, along the lines of:
No, no. Too salacious. More like
this, which actually
is a Christian romance novel.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:53 pm
by Jem
domino harvey wrote:here's the thing, the cover probably wouldn't look AS BAD if it had the Criterion Logo... but it's not too late for them to scrap their horrible, misguided idea to change logos. this is the equivalent of McDonalds losing the arches, Wendy's losing the red-haired daughter, Dr Pepper no longer having an orange-red stripe, 7-Up without the dot, Penguin books without the penguin, so on and so forth.
You have nailed it. McDonalds has the arches, Wendy's has the redder, Penguin books has the Penguin, and Criterion has the......? Spaced out letters? Sorry to say, no matter how much you love Criterion their logotype has no strong defining characteristics.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:56 pm
by Jem
matt wrote:Jem wrote:Apart from that, the Canterbury Tale cover is high kitsch, along the lines of:
No, no. Too salacious.
True, Fabio's "stupendous" nipples are a bit much.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:28 pm
by FilmFanSea
After all that passionate criticism and wringing of hands, the posted cover--still the same shitty artwork--
does contain the standard CC logo after all:
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:29 pm
by toiletduck!
But suddenly it works for me!
-Toilet Dcuk
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:29 pm
by cdnchris
Still sucks my sack, though.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:43 pm
by Gigi M.
toiletduck! wrote:But suddenly it works for me!
It certainly works for me too.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:52 pm
by ellipsis7
Just the sort of thing to get the Glue Man going!.. Yes I like it too...
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 4:52 pm
by Anthony
I'm Hatin It!
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 5:45 pm
by Steven H
Is it just me or does Sheila's nose look like she's been hittin the hooch, ole St. Nick style? I've seen Canterbury Tale a dozen times, and I don't remember Wild Turkey or burst capillaries anywhere. What an ugly cover.
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 6:01 pm
by Michael Kerpan
The cover seems to be related to
this actual shot.
So the concept of the cover isn't all that outlandish -- though the execution is a bit off (the angle of the face is wrong).
Posted: Tue Apr 25, 2006 6:15 pm
by hammock
But who decided to give her a red nose? The shot is b/w!
