Friday, November 20, 2009

One of the Worst. Movie Posters. Ever.

If you look back to one of my first posts you'll find I detest digitally inserted images in movie posters, mostly because the items usually inserted would be no problem to film. But one thing I really don't like is digitally inserted "hands holding things." Such as:


These of course are DVD covers, but you get the idea. And I have literally had arguments about whether the hands in these images were photoshopped in or not. Let's put it this way. If not, wouldn't you also have to believe that the characters of The Office were staged in front of a blue background, lit from separate angles, and arranged on some sort of odd stair steps? And if you believed that, wouldn't you also have to agree that you are a moron?

Anyway, even if this poster isn't the worst looking photoshop job I've ever seen, it still pisses me off.

Since the devil is in the details, let's go ahead ignore that according to the poster, Robert DeNiro's arm must look something like this guy's (relax it's a statue):

First off, when did this become the standard format for Christmas movie posters: sparse white background, red or green lettering, obligatory Christmas item (bow, present, ribbon), and a 50% chance someone's going to be wrapped up in Christmas lights?

Secondly, why would you want to continue in that format, identifying your Christmas movie with these pieces of trash: Surviving Christmas, Christmas with the Kranks, Deck the Halls, Four Christmases, Fred Claus, Nothing Like the Holidays, and of course the ABC Family hit, The Dog Who Saved Christmas starring Dean Cain and Mario Lopez.

Finally, the main offender, the camera. Which marketing executive pulled this idea out of a hat 15 minutes before the meeting with Miramax? I could literally think of tens of better concepts. And here's where the photoshopping really gets me. The image on the camera's screen is the exact same image as the poster itself. Let's look at how little sense this makes.

1) When was the last time you were able to self-take a picture and fit two people so comfortably in the frame, let alone four?
2) The camera is pointed at their chests, not their faces.
3) The camera is tilted from the orientation of the poster, and the image is likewise tilted. Tell me, how did that work? Who will teach the kids about perspective, who?

I mean what are we, to believe this is some sort of a magic camera or something? Boy, I really hope someone got fired for that blunder. (And yes, I am wearing my "Genius at Work" T-shirt.)

All that being said, the movie doesn't look terrible, and I encourage you to view the trailer and decide for yourself.


Alex said...

haha, yeah, I think the movie looks like it could be good. The photoshoped Michael Scott arms have weirded me out for quite some time.

And make sure you don't blame the (usually) legitimately creative designers. Stupid movie posters are more often than not the fault of the in-studio marketing execs who who have the power to tell the ad agency what to do after their teenage daughter gave them a "really great" idea.

stephanie Daniel said...

Hahaha... as a graphic design major, I thoroughly enjoyed that.