MoC Cover Art & Packaging Babble-on

[denti alligator]

To be fair, the artwork is based on the original theatrical poster.

And it's really, really cool.

[TMDaines]

This is one of those spoilers where only people repeatedly telling you that it's a spoiler makes it one. I don't think seeing this poster/cover would have ruined anything before having watched the film.

[RossyG]

This is one of those spoilers where only people repeatedly telling you that it's a spoiler makes it one.

This. Exactly this.

I'd never have even thought of the cover image whilst watching the film. But I will now, no matter how hard I try not to.

[Ishmael]

This is one of those spoilers where only people repeatedly telling you that it's a spoiler makes it one. I don't think seeing this poster/cover would have ruined anything before having watched the film.

And the same thing with Criterion's release of The Brood. I've never seen the film, and I never would've realized that the cover was spoiling anything, but since so many people here have said it's a spoiler, it's now become one.

[rapta]

Coming soon: Masters of Cinema's edition of Citizen Kane, with a screen grab of a burning sled named Rosebud on the cover.

I would happily buy an MoC edition of Kane even if it came with a full plot synopsis print on the front.

[Drucker]

This is one of those spoilers where only people repeatedly telling you that it's a spoiler makes it one. I don't think seeing this poster/cover would have ruined anything before having watched the film.

And the same thing with Criterion's release of The Brood. I've never seen the film, and I never would've realized that the cover was spoiling anything, but since so many people here have said it's a spoiler, it's now become one.

This isn't a film like Psycho or Diabolique where knowing the ending somehow diminishes the impact of the film, either.

[Ishmael]

This isn't a film like Psycho or Diabolique where knowing the ending somehow diminishes the impact of the film, either.

Aaaannnddd... MORE spoilers!

Though who hasn't seen Psycho and Diabolique, I guess?

[TMDaines]

This is one of those spoilers where only people repeatedly telling you that it's a spoiler makes it one.

This. Exactly this.

I'd never have even thought of the cover image whilst watching the film. But I will now, no matter how hard I try not to.

I can't remember the particular example which irked me, but it was a cover or a poster that seemed completely innocuous having not watched the film and one that you would gloss over.

[Ashirg]

DVD covers for Planet of the Apes come to mind.

[rapta]

Seems the logo for the Medium Cool release has had a last-minute tweak (and thankfully no longer looks like it's for toothpaste packaging):



Looking forward to this one!

[cdnchris]

Was it mentioned somewhere why the Paramount titles remove the Eureka! logo from the front (I don't have any of the Paramount titles so don't know if it's still displayed on the spine)? I think I remember that being mentioned before but couldn't find it. Do they not like the other "brand" displayed so prominently? And also, I notice that the Arrow/MoC/Shout! titles licenced from MGM display the MGM logo on the spines. How did Criterion get out of having to do any of this?

[rapta]

Was it mentioned somewhere why the Paramount titles remove the Eureka! logo from the front (I don't have any of the Paramount titles so don't know if it's still displayed on the spine)? I think I remember that being mentioned before but couldn't find it. Do they not like the other "brand" displayed so prominently? And also, I notice that the Arrow/MoC/Shout! titles licenced from MGM display the MGM logo on the spines. How did Criterion get out of having to do any of this?

I asked Kevin about it once and he said that Paramount have it as one of their prerequisites for releasing any of their titles. Strangely, Paramount don't mind the Eureka title on the spine instead but refuse to have it on the top strip on the front cover - I think Eureka have had some trouble understanding the logic around that, but perhaps Paramount's thinking is that they don't want the Average Joe to think the film was produced by Eureka (or something weird like that...it will say 'A Paramount Pictures Release' or something on the back credits).

Fox and MGM ask for the studio logo to be present on the spine (or at least since Red River was released, in the case of MoC) but yeah, not Paramount. Universal seem to be more reasonable and just ask for the Universal logo to be on the reverse and don't seem to mind the Eureka logo.

Anyway, no idea why Criterion can bypass all of this. My inkling is they have some sort of financial arrangement to cover that kind of thing.

[PfR73]

The Eureka logo is still on the spine of the Paramount titles; in fact, there is no Paramount logo on the spine. A blu-ray.com user posted a photo of the recent releases on their shelf, and some of the Paramount titles (such as Paper Moon & Stalag 17) are visible.

Edit: I didn't read rapta's reply above closely enough. I thought the question about the spine wasn't fully answered, but it was.

[rapta]

Yeah just to clarify...

Paramount titles:
- no Eureka logo on front cover
- Eureka logo on spine
- no Paramount title on spine
- Paramount logo on back cover

Fox/MGM titles:
- Eureka logo on front
- Eureka logo on spine
- Fox/MGM logo on spine (but only as of the last 2 years it seems)
- Fox/MGM logo on back cover

Universal titles:
- Eureka logo on front cover
- Eureka logo on spine
- no Universal logo on spine
- Universal logo on back cover

So yeah, Eureka logo is on every spine no matter who the studio/distributor...it's only Paramount who are funny about them putting it on the front as well. Same thing goes with Eureka Classics titles - notice upcoming titles like The Man Who Could Cheat Death and The Skull don't have the Eureka Classics logo on the front 'cause they're both Paramount titles.

[eerik]

[FrauBlucher]

Shane is an outstanding cover. Just lovely.

[tenia]

All 3 look very good, but I guess it's down to the original artworks used.

[andyli]

All three? Am I missing something?

[cdnchris]

He might be referring to the non-Moc Eureka! release of Robinson Crusoe on Mars:

[tenia]

Yes indeed, I was refering to the 2 MoC + the 1 Eureka Classics.

[rapta]

December titles being announced...

[Finch]

A screenshot from the film would surely have been better than this poster cover.

[NABOB OF NOWHERE]

Otherwise known as 'Get your tits out for the Outlaw boys'.

[Michael Kerpan]

I hope she wasn't out in the snow when this picture was taken...

[swo17]

Well if she was, it was the last time De Toth would ever film her in that snowed-in Wyoming town...