criterionforum.org

Haha, I take back everything I’ve ever said about your inability to judge terrible covers. That’s hideous.

It’s better than the temp art, but only just barely

That's a steelbook release from the U.S. and Canada, and the one I posted on the last page is the French cover

Wait, that's what the studio think alternate cool art looks like? Literal LOLs

I was hoping the steelbook for this would look good, but alas.

Tarantino's "Once upon a Time..." is cursed with bad covers... I mean, what are they leaning on?

The rear projection screen.

The weirdest double feature of all-time?

Wrong thread.

I was gonna say, that looks exactly like what I'd expect for a Jackie Chan film cover

Am I the only one who often (but not always) sees just the word 'Image', and no actual image in posts on this site? I can see Dylan's JPG, but not Alphonse's below.

Alphone's pic is from Twitter, which may be blocked at your work?

I don't have any sites blocked (am on home computer), but I just double-checked and the image loads fine on Safari. So the issue must somehow lie with Firefox (my default browser).

Cash Flagg wrote: Tue Oct 29, 2019 6:29 pm I don't have any sites blocked (am on home computer), but I just double-checked and the image loads fine on Safari. So the issue must somehow lie with Firefox (my default browser).

Newer versions of Firefox have Enhanced Tracking Protection enabled by default. Click on the purplish blue shield icon left of the URL to find out more.

Thanks, that did the trick.

i found this on Barnes & Nobles' site. The lower section has actually been cut and pasted from the current Criterion cover, same font, shadowing, etc.

Get rid of all the humans and the cover would be perfect.

Get rid of all the mfunks and the thread would be perfect.

Cash Flagg wrote: Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:50 pm Get rid of all the mfunks and the thread would be perfect.

If you like that hideous Goldfinch cover then, well, more power to you

I don't actively like it, no, I'm just indifferent to it. For some reason, you insist on repeatedly posting generic, unimaginative studio art, instead of the memorably bizarre, uniquely crude, laugh-out-loud oddities of the foreign or counterfeit variety that used to make reading this thread so much fun.

It makes me think of a new Kingsmen sequel.

Cash Flagg wrote: Thu Nov 07, 2019 9:22 pm I don't actively like it, no, I'm just indifferent to it. For some reason, you insist on repeatedly posting generic, unimaginative studio art, instead of the memorably bizarre, uniquely crude, laugh-out-loud oddities of the foreign or counterfeit variety that used to make reading this thread so much fun.

You might want to go through the first few pages of the first part of this thread and re-acquaint yourself with the fact that shitty studio covers have always been a part of it since before either of us were here. Counterfeit covers from Chinatown bazaars are like shooting fish in a barrel, and they're often funny - but one thing I don't see you doing is posting anything of value in this thread yourself