This is a new running feature about the Blu Ray format. Bad cover art. Inexplicable products given Blu Ray Treatment, and more. If you have anything you see along your journeys that would make for a fun addition, send it my way.
What the hell just happened? How did this cover get approved in 2010? How did this cover get approved when Michael Mann is one of the most micromanaging people in the film industry? How did this cover get approved when there are apps for your phone that can do digital blending that makes this look like the handiwork of I Am Sam with a C64?
Collateral is a movie I love. I watch it a whole bunch. I don’t care that it becomes a typical thriller in the last act. It’s jazz. It’s alive. It’s almost a truly great movie. And the original artwork is oddly effective considering the shot is so oddly laid out (though Jamie Foxx’s addition to the DVD cover is ill advised).
Blu Ray doesn’t have to mean ‘different’. In fact, by going with the branding and iconography that made a product successful you have the ability to coast on that recognition. This looks like the Goodtimes VHS versions of movies from the 80’s. The seal of absolutely no quality. Nightmare town.
Worse yet, look at the back of the box. It’s like Jamie Foxx and Jada Pinkett are being attacked by Rodan:
I didn’t buy this disc, that’s how bad this art is. And I’ll buy ANYTHING.
16 comments
Would you buy me Nick? I'm yours for $5.50, plus a giant pretzel.
Yea, it's bad, but I like the movie too much to NOT get this on blu-ray. This will look fucking gorgeous on blu. And haha @ Rodan attack. Oh, and on the same day, Days of Heaven came out on blu-ray! Review that shit son!
Hey Nunz, it's Jada Pickett SMITH! Re-spect!
It's Jada Pinkett as far as I'm concerned. I don't care whose beard you are, if you're a professional performer you don't go round changing your name every time a preacher says "man and wife."
I couldn't agree more. I almost bought this but that cover art was just too shitty. I'll stick with my normal looking DVD. Don't these studios realize that blu-ray is mainly a market for hardcore movie lovers and that cover art is pretty fuckin' important to them, especially when your paying twice the price than the DVD version.
Cruise does look appropriately midget-esque though… Have they touched his voice up with a note of helium also?
I know there's a website out there (forgot the name, but a search on bing should find it) that have scans of alternate artwork and you can modify it to fit your blu ray case – I did this for the blu-ray of New World whose artwork was awful, and it worked like a charm – I would do this for Collateral, though I didnt like the movie that much to buy it at full retail (the third act kinda ruined it for me, it seemed like Mann (or the studio) tacked in on in order to pander to the women-folk in the audience only to make them peek behind their hands to their face and clutch their boyfiends/husbands arms in the process)
You didn't buy the blu of a movie you *LOVE* because the cover was bad? How does that make sense? Isn't the film and it's presentation on your screen what's important? Won't your disc box spend 99% of it's time on a shelf? We're you planning on hanging it on your wall?
It's your decision, but that one strikes me as odd.
David – it's a matter of principle. I'm the same way. Some hack with Photoshop (probably several) got paid to create this abomination. It doesn't matter if it spends most of the time on the shelf, the point is that studios have dozens of great artwork designs sitting around for each movie and they inevitably decide to release films with the most generic piece of Photoshopped crap they can muster up. I dunno if it's some sort of lowest common denominator thing, that there might be some real mouth breathers out there who won't consider buying Blu Rays with tasteful covers, but it pisses me RIGHT THE FUCK OFF. And it's not just Blu Ray, they did it for years with DVD, and they've been doing it for decades with promotional posters.
So, is awesome cover art enough to make you buy a movie that's complete shit or to run out and find the poster, just because you like looking at it? That's pretty much the exact same logic that you guys that hate the cover art are using for NOT buying a movie you love.
I've been put off by shitty cover art in the past, especially if the theatrical poster was awesome. I would of bought Confessions of a Dangerous Mind and A History of Violence at full price if the artwork hadn't been so bad. In fact, I would have owned the "History" blu-ray by now if it didn't contain the same artwork as the dvd. And everytime I see the new 20th Century Fox bargain releases, the covers just look cheap I figure they didn't bother bringing a decent transfer to blu-ray.
Attacked by Rodan. Damn near choked on a pretzel with that one. Good idea, hope to see more.
I agree with everything in this post.
Though cover art is somewhat incidental if you just download the Blu Ray and have your computer running to your TV. You just need a vid card with HDMI out and a pretty solid rig to back it.
This movie is SO much better in HD. As is Sexy Beast btw which I don't think ever made it to Blu Ray but was on the now dead HD and well worth seeking out.
all i know is Nick, that you bought that movie at FRY's…
and yes the DVD version is much superior as are covers from Uk/Region 2.
Gwai Lo – Are you guys graphic designers or photoshop hobbyists by any chance? Otherwise I can't imagine why this is so important to you. If we're talking about a movie I LOVE, or even really like, it could come in a plain white wrapper with the title in black print like something out of Repo Man and I'd still buy it.
I'd rather you jump on the DNR crap that's ruining great movies, then move on to bad cover art.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.