criterionforum.org

so lightly here wrote:Gosh, with the cover being so pristine and with so much complaining about (perhaps) not being able to read it, it seems that the fine lines add just a little more interest to the cover. Why (in the "Coney Island" book cover) is the line broken with the words "of the" between "Island" and "Mind" or the snowflakes before and after the author's first name? Why the lines on the spine of "Salo" and "or"? Cuz they add a bit of interest? I don't know, but I wouldn't worry my little head about it too awfully much when the overall design comes of so smoothly.

Are you kidding me? The lines are Salo serve a very specific purpose. They're tally marks. They count to 120. The movie's subtitle is The 120 Days of Sodom. As far as lines separating, say, article phrases and the like, that's not problem at all. It's been done for probably centuries by now and is just a nice little aesthetic break. But what isn't done, and what doesn't look good, is splitting up an adjective and its noun arbitrarily. It looks sloppy, especially since the rest of the title, and indeed the rest of the text on the cover is centered. It looks extremely unbalanced.

As for the design coming off, uh, "smoothly," well, I guess I'll just have to take your word for it. Or worry my little head about it some more. Or something.

kaujot wrote:

so lightly here wrote: Why the lines on the spine of "Salo" and "or"?

Are you kidding me? The lines are Salo serve a very specific purpose. They're tally marks. They count to 120. The movie's subtitle is The 120 Days of Sodom.

You don't read very closely, do you?

Bah, missed the spine bit. Regardless of that, my point still stands. Lines are often used to separate and emphasize articles, not noun phrases.

kaujot wrote:Bah, missed the spine bit. Regardless of that, my point still stands. Lines are often used to separate and emphasize articles, not noun phrases.

I not sure diagraming a sentence and cover design are in the same ballpark. I will have to mull that over.

Diagramming a sentence?

kaujot wrote:Diagramming a sentence?

An example

I'm well aware what diagramming a sentence looks like. I have a degree in linguistics. My question was more of "How did you think I was talking of diagramming sentences" because I couldn't tell if his tone was sarcastic or serious.

kaujot wrote:I'm well aware what diagramming a sentence looks like. I have a degree in linguistics. My question was more of "How did you think I was talking of diagramming sentences" because I couldn't tell if his tone was sarcastic or serious.

I was only commenting on your seemingly strong set of rules for how lines work with words. After "mulling it over" I find that I don't have any set of rules as far as lines and words when used graphically. No need to get excited and I only say that 'cuz your little avatar always makes me think it is you and the photo makes you look easily excitable!

You know those avatars carry a lot of baggage with them. I almost always assume the person is whatever sex their avatar is, if it is vaguely human. You assume I am male and I don't even have an accompanying photo.

As far as I am aware, every single poster on this forum is male except for LQ.

swo17 wrote:As far as I am aware, every single poster on this forum is male except for LQ.

I could be wrong, but I don't recall ever mentioning my gender and even if I had I could have easily been telling an untruth. So many assumptions are made, especially under the cloak of anonymity. One must remain ever vigilant!

swo17 wrote:As far as I am aware, every single poster on this forum is male except for LQ.

There's at least one other female, but I won't "out" her in case she'd rather not have it known.

Barmy?

so lightly here wrote: You know those avatars carry a lot of baggage with them. I almost always assume the person is whatever sex their avatar is, if it is vaguely human.

I hope you're not assuming I am vaguely human.

I always just assumed you were some sort of giant TV with multiple screens, zedz, it would explain... a lot.

Zedz is videodrome? Guess I don't want the new flesh to live afterall.

Made in U.S.A.
2 or 3 Things I Know About Her

Another great packaging job on Godard by CC, love the interior on both of them.

I always love their packaging for Godards.

Wow. Both are quite good, but I prefer 2 or 3 Things. Way to go, Criterion!

Absolutely agreed, the art work is fantastic. Great job. =D>

It seems like DVD Beaver reviewed Made in USA a week ago, hopefully we get a response to 2 or 3 things soon, and I'm also really looking forward to having a glance at the Repulsion release via Chris' reviews here.

They reviewed that 'two or three' weeks ago.

Every time I see those Essential Art House covers lined up in my local DVD shop, I can't help thinking how much more attractive they are than almost all the standard CC stuff. I like the uniform style, too. I've been tempted to double dip a couple of times. Anyone else feel the same? Sorry if this has been covered already.

Not to be contrarian, but I've always thought the opposite. The stills are occasionally very nice, but I find them excessively plain - almost aggressively plain. But I'd be curious to hear the consensus on these.

They're classy. The standardized format might get dull in a few years but they always choose great stills and, for some reason I can't explain, I love the no line break between the label and title.