criterionforum.org

I dunno, I always thought Cassavetes looks like he's sneezing in that picture. I like the titling however.

La Notte is just awful.

I really like the I Married a Witch and The Uninvited covers.

That I Married a Witch artwork makes me think that Sullivan's travels upgrade got bumped last minute--look at how similar the art is--I bet we see Sullivan's Travels and maybe the Lady Eve in November or december.

The first thing I thought of too. Of course, the Sullivan's cover pretty much just emphasizes everything wrong with Witch's cover.

Stupid eyebrow, right? Had they just chosen a more autumn like color and turned down the MS paintness it could have been a very good cover easily.

Luke M wrote:Not to further the DVD-to-Blu cover debate, but I am happy to see they didn't change the cover art for the Cassavetes set.

Really? The old set is ass-ugly

Moe Dickstein wrote:

Luke M wrote:Not to further the DVD-to-Blu cover debate, but I am happy to see they didn't change the cover art for the Cassavetes set.

Really? The old set is ass-ugly

I always thought the graphics on the white backgrounds on the digipacks gave the set a prestigious look. Could've been the extraordinary price tag coloring my judgement though.

both of those Veronica Lake images are from the original posters, so i'm not so sure it means anything is forthcoming.

FakeBonanza wrote:Solaris and The Red Shoes may be the only updated covers in the collection that aren't superior to the originals.

cough cough...Amarcord...Amarcord!...cough, cough cough... >dies<

criterion can be so wrong-headed at times. I mean the original amarcord poster is, like, one of the most beloved poster designs ever, isn't it? the newer cover is just so not fellini-esque, everyone looks so awkward and sweaty. but the last criterion-designed cover I like was for Kind Hearts and Coronets. and that was a cover that somehow succeeded by emulating the Ealing poster designs, which were crappy to begin with!

Did anyone ever get to the bottom of the weird pattern on Cassavetes's neck?

med wrote:Did anyone ever get to the bottom of the weird pattern on Cassavetes's neck?

It looks like a shirt collar to me. The high contrast just makes the white part of the collar blend in with his neck.

It isn't. I've seen the same pic elsewhere (possibly in the set itself? I don't remember) without the pattern.

jindianajonz wrote:

med wrote:Did anyone ever get to the bottom of the weird pattern on Cassavetes's neck?

It looks like a shirt collar to me. The high contrast just makes the white part of the collar blend in with his neck.

I always thought it looked like he had been run over by a car/bike, thus leaving some sort of tire tread on his neck (Looney Tunes style).

Sick neck tat, bro.

The I Married a Witch cover would have been ace if they had just used THIS.

They could've also just slapped some text on this publicity photo and it would've made a great cover (for I Married a Witch, not the Cassavetes box)

med wrote:It isn't. I've seen the same pic elsewhere (possibly in the set itself? I don't remember) without the pattern.

Nope, definitely a shirt collar. You can see it more clearly on the booklet cover.

EDIT: Check the bottom pic here

Now that that's solved, what the hell is that blurry "m" in Veronica Lake's hair? That's cover shows one of the most inept attempts at adding texture and shading I've seen in a while.
Where do they find these people?

domino harvey wrote:(for I Married a Witch, not the Cassavetes box)

Well now you're just being closed minded

Gregory wrote:Now that that's solved, what the hell is that blurry "m" in Veronica Lake's hair? That's cover shows one of the most inept attempts at adding texture and shading I've seen in a while.
Where do they find these people?

Not sure, but looking at it gives me an uncontrollable urge to go get some chicken mcnuggets.

movielocke wrote:That I Married a Witch artwork makes me think that Sullivan's travels upgrade got bumped last minute--look at how similar the art is--I bet we see Sullivan's Travels and maybe the Lady Eve in November or december.

This really exposes the problem. The stylized Lake cartoon on Sullivan's Travels works because it's an actual stylized cartoon of Veronica Lake - same with the original posters domino posted. This new cover is a fussy digital approximation of those cartoons, and it looks as third-hand and amateurish as that implies. The same basic design, in an actual period, brush-stroke style would have been unadventurous but much more palatable.

Maybe I'm missing something or the fees are just exorbitant, but why does CC feels it is necessary to hire designers for their covers when in many cases the original poster art would be so much better?

Because having a "Criterion cover" has eclipsed, pun intended, the desire to have "Criterion extras"

vsski wrote:Maybe I'm missing something or the fees are just exorbitant, but why does CC feels it is necessary to hire designers for their covers when in many cases the original poster art would be so much better?

Their in-house guy, Eric Skillman, designed that, so I'm sure it was indeed cheaper than licensing the original poster art. There are also sometimes limitations on how much you can modify the original art, and those posters have a lot more text than Criterion typically includes.

That's a Skillman cover? Wow, what's happened?

I gotta say I really like the Witch cover.

I'd be pretty disappointed in a Criterion release that just used the original poster at this point.