Criterion Cover Art & Packaging Babble-on Vol.2

Message

Cinesimilitude · #1551 Post by **Cinesimilitude** » Wed Oct 18, 2006 11:24 pm

fdm wrote:
Mr Pixies wrote:It would be cool if the Yojimbo/Sanjuro releases are single digipacks. (would be cool if they all were...)
Would not.

Mr Pixies! you woke it!

sillyness aside, these are surely going to be 2 single-wide amaray cases, since they are being sold seperately, and will simply be placed in a slipcase for the set, a la 'I am Curious'.

jon · #1552 Post by **jon** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 12:56 am

considering the art for the 2 kurosawas, it might be nice to see a slip cover on top of the regular cover if it doesn't turn out to be a digi. It is a nice texture and has a theme to it that might really work well with the over used and often redundant slip cover.

arsonfilms · #1553 Post by **arsonfilms** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 1:39 am

Although I don't disagree with the slip-cover assesment at all, I'd like to point out the reason for the redundant slip covers in case anyone isn't aware: It makes it substantially more difficult to steal a disc out of a security keeper in a brick and morter store if a slipcover is used. It actually has more to do with loss prevention than with aesthetics or marketing,

jon · #1554 Post by **jon** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 10:03 am

well, as crazy as it sounds, i would like to see the new kurosawas in digis. the only reason i said the slips might work is because of the nature of the art. i hate slip covers personally, but there is no question that the art would look better without the case showing. Thats the only reason why i said it might work, not because im a slip cover fiend, but because it will make the art look better if a digi is out of the question (and i usually hate digis). whatever, any other suggestion for the packaging?

arsonfilms · #1555 Post by **arsonfilms** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:06 am

Actually, I'm pretty keen on the idea of clear amarays in a box like I Am Curious. I agree that the black plastic would distract from the design, and I've been pretty happy with the move to clear. The digipaks would be great (although you and I seem to be the only people that like them), but theres no way Criterion will do different packages for the boxed and non-boxed discs, and I wouldn't hold out much hope that they'd do a single disc digi just due to how fragile they can be on their own.

jon · #1556 Post by **jon** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 12:33 pm

oh clear digis, i havent even seen the new packaging for keep cases yet. I am not the biggest Digi fan for all releases because they tend to be more fragile. But i guess the clear digi will be a lot less distracting for the cover. I wish that they would make the Yoj/San set into a digi and the indiviudals into armarys. Make the set look like the Ugetsu set. It would look amazing.

Gigi M. · #1557 Post by **Gigi M.** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 12:59 pm

djali999 · #1558 Post by **djali999** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 1:44 pm

"They don't like the C, eh? Goddamit it! Make it invisible then!"

Cinephrenic · #1559 Post by **Cinephrenic** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 1:54 pm

or black.

jon · #1560 Post by **jon** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:01 pm

doesn't look as polished as the other New-C dvds that have come out recently

gubbelsj · #1561 Post by **gubbelsj** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:04 pm

jon wrote:doesn't look as polished as the other New-C dvds that have come out recently

Perhaps, but it's not exactly a very polished film.

denti alligator · #1562 Post by **denti alligator** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 2:14 pm

jon wrote:doesn't look as polished as the other New-C dvds that have come out recently

WAY better than Mouchette.

Cinephrenic · #1563 Post by **Cinephrenic** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 3:56 pm

Mouchette looks extremely lazy.

toiletduck! · #1564 Post by **toiletduck!** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:17 pm

A little dissenting opinion, in case the ladies and fellas at CriCo really do take this into consideration.

Aside from a twinge of issues with the wacky C, I really like the Mouchette cover, and I tend to avoid screenshot covers (such as The Children Are Watching Us, which I consider quite lazy). It's got a stark, "Bam! Mouchette." frankness about it that works better for Bresson than any stylized cover possibly could. And the title font gives it just the slightest (necessary) amount of elegance.

The only way I could see it improving is the removal of the wacky C, which I'm assuming would only make it worse for you detractors.

-Toilet Dcuk

#1565 Post by **domino harvey** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:20 pm

the Mouchette cover is beautiful.

the Border Radio cover, however, truly might be the worst Criterion cover I've ever seen

Cinesimilitude · #1566 Post by **Cinesimilitude** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:38 pm

domino harvey wrote:the Mouchette cover is beautiful.

the Border Radio cover, however, truly might be the worst Criterion cover I've ever seen

You're way with constructive criticism is astounding.

Hey Criterion, don't change a thing.

jon · #1567 Post by **jon** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:03 pm

The Border Radio cover looks more lazy than the Mouchette cover. There is an elegance to the Mouchette cover that is growing on me.

Gubbelsj, i personally havent seen Border Radio yet but know where a comment like that might make sense, though, if that is a good representation of the film, is it also shit?

Mr Pixies · #1568 Post by **Mr Pixies** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:52 pm

Digi pack might be the wrong word, look at the Rohmer set, or the Fassbinder set, those individual cases are called what? I think of them as digis, I was thinking of them for the Yojimbo/Sanjuro packaging. And it would be neat for single releases to be in those thin single "digi" packaging.

I don't like the Border Radio cover, I'll be buying it, but I hope they change it....it needs either a lot more, or a lot less.

gubbelsj · #1569 Post by **gubbelsj** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 7:10 pm

jon wrote:Gubbelsj, i personally havent seen Border Radio yet but know where a comment like that might make sense, though, if that is a good representation of the film, is it also shit?

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's shit, although plenty of people might call it that and be totally justified. It might best be dubbed mediocre and clumsy. However, people really into the LA punk scene (old school) will be interested. It's got John Doe, it's got Dave Alvin, it's got Chris D. In this way, it almost functions as a scrapbook of the times, and perhaps that's the best way to view it - a local film, best appreciated at the local level. If you're particularly fascinated by Los Angeles (well, one small underground segment of Los Angeles), you might dig this film. But it definitely flirts with the half-assed.

#1570 Post by **domino harvey** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:08 pm

jon wrote:Gubbelsj, i personally havent seen Border Radio yet but know where a comment like that might make sense, though, if that is a good representation of the film, is it also shit?

man this was funny =D>

#1571 Post by **domino harvey** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 11:10 pm

SncDthMnky wrote:
domino harvey wrote:the Border Radio cover, however, truly might be the worst Criterion cover I've ever seen
You're way with constructive criticism is astounding.

Hey Criterion, don't change a thing.

one, it was clearly a reference to whoever said pretty much the same thing about the Mouchette cover, and two, I agree. I think the Border Radio cover is terrible, but the Criterion art department needs to quit changing covers based on what people say here and elsewhere.

Cinesimilitude · #1572 Post by **Cinesimilitude** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 1:13 am

domino harvey wrote:one, it was clearly a reference to whoever said pretty much the same thing about the Mouchette cover, and two, I agree. I think the Border Radio cover is terrible, but the Criterion art department needs to quit changing covers based on what people say here and elsewhere.

we're cool then.

colinr0380 · #1573 Post by **colinr0380** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:22 am

domino harvey wrote:
jon wrote:Gubbelsj, i personally havent seen Border Radio yet but know where a comment like that might make sense, though, if that is a good representation of the film, is it also shit?
man this was funny =D>

Now that's a classy way to totally destroy a film!

toiletduck! wrote:"Bam! Mouchette."

Could this also be a stripped-down, Bressonian review of the film's content?

Alonzo the Armless · #1574 Post by **Alonzo the Armless** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:43 am

For those interested, I found out that the cover for MONSTERS AND MADMEN was done by Darwyn Cooke.

Greathinker · #1575 Post by **Greathinker** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:08 am

What's so lazy about Mochette's cover? It's typical Bresson minimalism, just like all his other covers in the criterion collection, save Balthazar.

Monsters and Madmen looks fantastic. Anyone starting to notice a new trend with criterion towards a slightly more abstract, book cover way of designing?