Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

[Janie]

Inspired by this thread, over the past 6 or 8 years I've noticed that DVD cover art can be a real hit-or-miss proposition. As a longtime movie fanatic, I find I'm partial to DVD covers that more or less replicate the original theatrical poster art as much as possible, which is not only cheaper for the studios but also helps with instant recognizability for DVD shoppers. Sometimes this doesn't always work, and newer DVD cover designs will utilize alternate poster art or newer artwork, and can actually be very attractive in their own right. However, and I notice this occurring with a discomforting frequency, many DVD releases are given weak or even downright terrible cover art (often emphasizing faces to the detriment of everything else), so much so that it begs the question of "what were they thinking?"

Here's some examples of what I mean:

Theatrical poster art:


DVD cover art:


Theatrical poster art:


DVD cover art:


Theatrical poster art:


DVD cover art:


Theatrical poster art:




DVD cover art:


Theatrical poster art:


DVD cover art:


Theatrical poster art:


DVD cover art:


Theatrical poster art:


DVD cover art:


I know I'm not alone in noticing this disturbing trend. Can't anything be done?

[quasimodo1384]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

don't forget the new Dumbo and Fox and the Hound DVD covers *shudders*

[RooBear]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

Now this is a facinating thread...I never noticed it before--you have an excellent point.

peace,
Roo

[TanyAnnette]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

don't forget the new Dumbo and Fox and the Hound DVD covers *shudders*

*shudders and convulses*

[pixie chick]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

I actually have noticed this before. I don't understand why the concept of the original art basically goes to waste so many times. Personally, floating heads & packing 8 screen shots onto a DVD cover isn't my thing. It's cluttered, messy & unappealing.

[Janie]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

don't forget the new Dumbo and Fox and the Hound DVD covers *shudders*

Good point.

1981 Theatrical poster art:


2006 DVD cover art:


[smilie=1,32,27]

Here's a couple of good redesigns, however:

Theatrical poster:


2006 DVD cover art:


Theatrical posters:



2006 DVD cover art:

(ok, not quite as dynamic as the theatrical poster art, but nicely done on its own merits)

[TanyAnnette]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

lol, this reminds me I need to buy a copy of F&TH

edit:
I just have to mention that Annette looks darlin' in the original poster art

[Hyperbole]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

lol, this reminds me I need to buy a copy of F&TH

It reminds me that I'm OLD! 25th Anniversary???? Holy crap.

[desertdweller]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

While I agree with you for the most part that the DVD cover art pales in comparison to the design, beauty and execution of original poster art, I think it has to do with scale and size.

As an artist I can appreciate that the majority of movie posters would not read well at all when reduced to such a small size. The traditional size for posters has been 27" X 41" for many decades. Reproducing that poster on a 5" X 7" case is much like printing highly detailed art on a postage stamp or Da Vinci's Last Supper on the head of nail.

[sailerm]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

In the case of older films like Merlin Jones, or Swiss Family, the cover art is very dated (not that there's anything worng with that) so it makes sense to update the DVD art to make it seem fresh.

I don't need the DVD art to mimic the theater poster, so long as it is good art, but unfortunatly is often isn't. The reason the use a lot of floating heads is because George Clooney and Brad Pitt's face sells DVDs, shadows don't.

I loved the CAV Laserdisc Version cover art of Aladdin, but you'll never see something so "artsy' on a DVD box

[Tui]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

Movie Posters and DVD covers don't really worry me. We'll always have the movie posters around.

I hate to always be bringing up CD's vs Vinyl but I will once again because I think its a similar issue.

With iTunes and everything we are coming closer and closer to not having this things sold in stores which is dissapointing. When records come out the first thing I admire is the Album art. For instance if you buy the Beatles White Album on CD you get a little booklet with a few pictures and lyrics in it. But if you own the record you get full pictures and a poster! You don't really see that nowadays. Album art was/is an art form, and the canvas is rapidly shrinking. Take this album cover for instance:



if you had this album art on your iPod it would be even smaller, but on an Album Cover the image is much larger and even more striking. The Album artwork use to be an advertisment in itself, now its just becoming something they just throw on so that you'll recognize the album and the artist. Smaller is convienient, but that doesn't make it better, or cooler.

[TanyAnnette]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

For instance if you buy the Beatles White Album on CD you get a little booklet with a few pictures and lyrics in it. But if you own the record you get full pictures and a poster!

I have The White Album (actually, the cover looks more like "The Dirty Grey Album" but, it was $1 at SalArmy!), mine wasn't cool enough to come with the poster though. But I do have George's "All Things Must Pass" with a really bad you-know-what poster

[quasimodo1384]

Re: Terrible DVD Cover Art vs. Good DVD Cover Art

I loved the CAV Laserdisc Version cover art of Aladdin, but you'll never see something so "artsy' on a DVD box

ooooooh! that's great!