Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

Discuss North American DVDs and Blu-rays or other DVD and Blu-ray-related topics.
Locked
Message
Author
User avatar
CSM126
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:22 am
Location: The Room
Contact:

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2226 Post by CSM126 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:00 am

Gregory wrote: I think it's insulting to intelligent viewers because it assumes that the important thing to them is familiar stars and all they need is a closeup of someone they've seen before.
Marketing of movies is almost literally never aimed at intelligent viewers. It's aimed at the dumbasses who make up 99.99 percent of the population.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2227 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:09 am

I presume you don't consider yourself to be one of them? You're in the 0.01%, I take it?
Last edited by mfunk9786 on Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
rspaight
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 10:18 am

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2228 Post by rspaight » Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:10 am

That's 0.01%, dumbass. :wink:

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2229 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:12 am

There was one 9 initially. I swear.

User avatar
CSM126
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:22 am
Location: The Room
Contact:

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2230 Post by CSM126 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:14 am

Please don't tell me we're going to start defending the intelligence of the general movie-going public who have made Hollywood into the festering cesspool of stupidity that it is with their wasted dollar.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2231 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:18 am

Oh, you're right, everyone's stupid but you because you like good movies. My mistake. You know there's more to life than that, right? You know that a lot of incredibly intelligent people use blockbuster films as escapism, and couldn't care less how objectively good what they're seeing is? And that you should just be happy that there are films out there for you, that you've seen and will continue to be able to see? Why can't people do what they want without being under your judgmental thumb?

User avatar
CSM126
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:22 am
Location: The Room
Contact:

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2232 Post by CSM126 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:32 am

Of course they can do whatever they want to do. And I can sit in my corner and continue to be baffled as to why so many people pay for insultingly-stupid crap and call it good. Let's be honest, in a landscape of films like Grown-Ups 2 and Smurfs 2, I could probably make a mint by releasing a movie that was just two hours of waving keys at the camera (in 3D, of course). It's kind of sad.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2233 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:01 am

Okay. You must be a lot of fun at dinner parties.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2234 Post by domino harvey » Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:15 am

A film like this is being marketed to a consumer who would otherwise be uninterested, who might see it and think "Oh, that sweet funny guy from Bridesmaids is in this" as that potential audience is larger than those who'd say "Oh, an Australian film about an Aboriginal pop group." Claims of racism are absurd and sad and further evidence of people on the internet willingly complaining about every single last goddamn thing possible

Mathew2468
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2235 Post by Mathew2468 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:19 am

I like the 3D key jingling idea.

User avatar
jindianajonz
Jindiana Jonz Abrams
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2236 Post by jindianajonz » Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

CSM126 wrote:Please don't tell me we're going to start defending the intelligence of the general movie-going public who have made Hollywood into the festering cesspool of stupidity that it is with their wasted dollar.
I don't want to turn a random complaint into something more sensible, but I was actually thinking about this lately when hearing about how Snowpiercer was cut to dumb it down "for the midwest." Is the public really to blame for these things, or is it just Hollywood's perception of the public? I've read articles in the past from people living in the midwest complaining about how Hollywood just doesn't "get" them; in films they are always boiled down to two or three small town stereotypes. It would be like assuming everybody who lives in LA was a stripper, a surfer, or a cutthroat business man.

Another problem is that a lot of the public don't have access to better movies. Looking at my local theater schedule It looks like my choices are largely confined to action, action, action, or The Butler. If i want to find another theater, I will have to drive over an hour away. Looking through the 2013 Dynamic Top Ten list, I think MAYBE Side Effects played here, but none of the others were ever screened. I know that this is somewhat based on the fact that movies like that didn't sell well here in the past, but there is still somebody somewhere who is making the decision to not screen "better" films here.

I posted this same link in my post on Kick Ass 2, but the comics world has a similar problem where companies don't make comics for girls because they assume girls won't buy comics because companies don't make comics for girls.
Last edited by jindianajonz on Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2237 Post by Zot! » Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:28 am

I've been suckered into seeing plenty of lousy independent or foreign films based on stars, directors, and perhaps even a poster or two. So, while I'd like to think of myself a a 0.01%er, I'm not immune to marketing. Really, at some point, learning too much about a film is going to prevent you from actually enjoying the movie. So, you could consider misleading advertising to be a favor. I've also been initially scared away from otherwise great films by lousy or cheap advertising, so thats no good either. Watching a movie is a gamble, either way.

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2238 Post by Zot! » Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:41 am

jindianajonz wrote:
CSM126 wrote:Please don't tell me we're going to start defending the intelligence of the general movie-going public who have made Hollywood into the festering cesspool of stupidity that it is with their wasted dollar.
I don't want to turn a random complaint into something more sensible, but I was actually thinking about this lately when hearing about how Snowpiercer was cut to dumb it down "for the midwest." Is the public really to blame for these things, or is it just Hollywood's perception of the public? I've read articles in the past from people living in the midwest complaining about how Hollywood just doesn't "get" them; in films they are always boiled down to two or three small town stereotypes. It would be like assuming everybody who lives in LA was a stripper, a surfer, or a cutthroat business man.

Another problem is that a lot of the public don't have access to better movies. Looking at my local theater schedule It looks like my choices are largely confined to action, action, action, or The Butler. If i want to find another theater, I will have to drive over an hour away. Looking through the 2013 Dynamic Top Ten list, I think MAYBE Side Effects played here, but none of the others were ever screened. I know that this is somewhat based on the fact that movies like that didn't sell well here in the past, but there is still somebody somewhere who is making the decision to not screen "better" films here.
There are three problems as I see it. Yes, there are a lot of simpletons. Also as mfunk mentions lots of "genius" level people, still somehow being able to enjoy the same banal entertainment as the simpletons. Also, Hollywood does not feel it has any responsibility for its content. In other state funded film programs there is some remit to provide quality childrens films, cultural and otherwise artistically signifcant product, whether the public want them or not. Hollywood used to work regardless, as the people running the show had some tangentially artistic purpose in addition to meeting their bottom line, but that no longer appears to be the case.

User avatar
Gregory
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2239 Post by Gregory » Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:34 pm

domino harvey wrote:A film like this is being marketed to a consumer who would otherwise be uninterested, who might see it and think "Oh, that sweet funny guy from Bridesmaids is in this" as that potential audience is larger than those who'd say "Oh, an Australian film about an Aboriginal pop group."
A better cover would have shown both of those things. They're not mutually exclusive. They put all their eggs in one basket, misrepresented the film, and missed the chance to actually represent the film and generate interest from more audiences than just the most mainstream "Bridesmaids" one. It's a misleading strategy that may fool a handful who wouldn't otherwise be interested in seeing an Australian film about an Aboriginal pop group to do just that (and probably be disappointed as a result) but I tend to think it's better to try and find the audience that wants to see the film for what it actually is, not market a niche title as if it's going to be a mainstream hit on the flimsiest grounds, desperately tries to make a leading man out of someone who obviously is not one. I'd seen him in a couple of things before but did not recognize him on this cover.

User avatar
Roger Ryan
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2240 Post by Roger Ryan » Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:00 pm

Since we're still talking about this, I'll add that Chris O'Dowd's entire appearance in the film is calculated to give the film a broader, more formulaic appeal. The film goes out of its way to show you the real members of The Sapphires at the end and to fill in biographical details, but curiously omits any reference to "the manager". One must assume O'Dowd's character is a convenient composite that doesn't actually have a real-life counterpart.

THE SAPPHIRES is really just a trifle steeped in cliches; the seven minute interview with the actual singers included as a bonus feature is far more interesting.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2241 Post by swo17 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:16 pm

O'Dowd is one of three main characters on The IT Crowd, a fairly popular British comedy series. It's a little weird to think that he might primarily be recognizable from Bridesmaids, where he's only like seventh-billed, and appears on none of that film's promotional materials.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2242 Post by domino harvey » Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:18 pm

It's the American cover, you're nuts if you think more people would know him over here from the IT Crowd than as Wiig's boyfriend in Bridesmaids, where despite billing he is the most prominent male figure in the film. The Brit cover features him as well, but uses his name in the top-most pull-quote for presumably the reason you suggest, swo:

Image

User avatar
manicsounds
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 10:58 pm
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2243 Post by manicsounds » Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:04 pm

The UK cover looks more like "My Name Is Earl"

User avatar
eerik
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 4:53 pm
Location: Estonia

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2244 Post by eerik » Thu Aug 29, 2013 5:59 pm

Kino went from this:

Image

to this:

Image


WTF?

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2245 Post by zedz » Thu Aug 29, 2013 8:21 pm

That's hilariously amateurish.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2246 Post by knives » Thu Aug 29, 2013 9:17 pm

Just to test if this thing works I just showed the two to my sisters and both said they would rather buy the new cover. Uggh.

User avatar
CSM126
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:22 am
Location: The Room
Contact:

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2247 Post by CSM126 » Thu Aug 29, 2013 11:46 pm

I don't know what you guys are talking about. I can't wait to buy "Nosfen Tu" on blu ray!

bamwc2
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2248 Post by bamwc2 » Fri Aug 30, 2013 8:57 am

Oh no! I just looked up the BD and it appears to be missing the commentary by Lokke Heiss (originally recorded for the laserdisc release!). I've never heard it, but it's heart breaking since Heiss was actually my doctor during my recent stint in graduate school. I knew that it was a match made in heaven when I found out that we both had Faces of Children in our all time top ten list!

User avatar
Der Spieler
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:05 am

Re: Kino

#2249 Post by Der Spieler » Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:15 am

Ugly ass cover. Especially when you put it against the MoC one.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/7 ... L1500_.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bürgermeister
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 7:05 am

Re: Worst DVD Covers...ever! (Part 3-D)

#2250 Post by Bürgermeister » Sat Aug 31, 2013 12:36 pm

This.
Image

Locked