Worst DVD covers! - Page 3

What is wrong with the Robocop covers?

Well, I find the Robocop covers really boring. For example, check out the original artwork (it was available on the VHS and first DVD release):



In my opinion, much better than the current artwork. As for the Prime Directives series...


'Nuf said.

Threads like this are the reason I love the HTF. I've been laughing my *** off for the past few minutes looking at all the bad photoshop-jobs and talking heads. These covers are horrible. (though I do think the Underworld cover is acceptable)

I don't know if the numbers back it up, but these covers probably exist because a large amount of the movie-buying public buys on name recognition alone. GOOD covers just confuse people (the suits at MGM have decided this, anyway). They've decided that Joe Paycheck could care less about the aesthetics of the packaging (again: another reason to love the HTF) ... witness Kevin Bacon's giant head or pastellized and airbrushed smiles and grimaces relating not at all to the movie at hand... and yet: "Honey, there's that funny guy, you liked him in that other movie. Let's pick it up."

Thus: dense and thoughtful movies have two people running from an explosion (?) of some sort on the cover. Models are hired (or images simply pulled from the stock library) to "sexualize" the cover of only vaguely erotic films to make it a more desirable purchase. Well-known actors with nothing but a brief cameo are blown up and featured like a lead actor on the film's DVD cover.

In many cases, the original movie poster design was enough to get people in the theater. Do they distrust the buying public that much that they have to change it?

I have the original cover art for The Frighteners and the Criterion edition of Robocop. They are both shockingly superior to the editions shown above. I mean, if you're going to go into photoshop and cram as many faces on the cover as possible, why not at least find a picture that wasn't taken while the actor was on the can between takes?

s (LOL)

This is related, in a way--awhile back A & E released boxed sets of the '70s British series UPSTAIRS DOWNSTAIRS, but those who designed the packaging obviously didn't have a clue about the series since photos from various seasons were randomly thrown around without any regard to the chronology of the series, and sometimes a one-shot appearance by an actor (rather than a series regular) was given ridiculous prominence! Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.

Pretend away! But I still didn't like the movie...

real genius and murder by death, 2 hilarious movies and 2 awful covers.

CJ

While it is not as bad as some of the covers already mentioned, I can't stand the cover of the Black Hawk Down Deluxe Edition. If there was ever a movie that shouldn't have one big face on the cover, it's this one.

Problems I have with certain box art:

Almost all of Disney's: That "floating head Photoshopped in" is getting tired, and, frankly, disturbing. "Don't eat me, Pollyanna!" And the fonts are rather uninspired. When they first released the movies to video, they at least used the original typefaces from the poster.

Bedknobs and Broomsticks: The cover favors characters who are in the film for all of 10 minutes. The same one is used for the soundtrack reissue, and these characters do not even sing!

Do unflattering photos of actors count? There are plenty of those on DVD covers.

I must give kudos to Warner for restoring original poster art to their vintage titles.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the cover for "Married With Children" season two. Anyway, I'll put in my vote for the recent release of "The Monster Club". The poster art is really nice and compliments the movie very well. Also, Damien: Omen II which makes it look more like a family drama than a horror film.

The revised artwork for The Last Samurai & Kill Bill Vol.1.

My question is why can't studio's just stick with the theatrical posters? For the most part, they're as good as, if not better, than DVD cover art. If they're worse, all they have to say is, 'Well, this is what the poster was'


eh?



Bryan

It comes down to the same thing every time, $$$$$.

By the time a movie comes out on DVD, the average consumer won't remember it (with most movies anyways) and usually the theatrical poster doesn't do much to draw their attention. Seeing their favorite actors/actresses on the cover draws their attention and gives them incentive to rent/purchase.

You'd be surprised at how well this strategy works. I've seen it work first-hand many times.

These "floating head" covers usually don't stop people who are already aware of the film from renting/purchasing it - so there's no downside revenue-wise.

As much as I hate these cover butcher-jobs, I can't blame the studios for doing it.

Map of the Human Heart is completely misleading, marketing it as a kids (!) film when it's really a sweeping romantic epic. Really retarded.

Great Point, never thought of it that way.



Bryan

Horrible photoshop job on the heads. What the hell is wrong with the colors?


Decent photoshop job but original poster was much better and the crowding of everything along with the god-awful font makes it look like a direct-to-video hack job (Plus it gives away a spoiler, kind of.)


Just look at it. (They have changed it to slightly better cover but the thought that this was even considered is scary.)


"But this is the back of the box, right?"


Unless Mark Harmon is lying down on the floor I have no idea what the hell the dog is doing.


Imagine: if I buy this DVD I will be able to see an actress with a top on.


Well, after looking at the box office returns for this flop, I have determined that this same exact notice could be posted on the PG-13 version.


Someone should be shot.


In DA HOOD!

Are we taking about the Region One covers, because those are so lazy. Revolutions was created in, I believe, 4 seconds.

Anyways my pics:


It worked with seven. Here it just looks lazy and without thought.





Looks like someone at Anchor Bay discoverd the Eraser tool.





If you're doing to add in The Doc, use the cover art from the second movie. Don't get some horrible artist to try and add him in. He sticks out like a sore thumb. And check out the perspective on the DeLoren. WTF is happening there.





...Wow... just... wow.





If you've seen the thearical poster, you know how good that was, and how awfully lazy this is.





And volume three is the same pic but with a blue tint. Brilliant... just brilliant.

I could go on, but I wont.

Aaron,

The Fog of War, Summer School and Reality Bites DVD art is basically the key art comes from the theatrical posters. You might not like it, but it's what the theatrical marketing campaign was in the first place.

You know, looking at these hilarious postings, we have to admit that SOME of these films just plain DESERVE the poor artwork. Jackass qualifies. My Boss's Daughter? Summer School? Hollywood Homicide? Delta Force?

Gimmee a break. These may actually sell to "Bad DVD cover Art" collectors.

I think we get the point some of you people don't like the Matrix Revolutions cover. Move along!

You really can't tell in the picture that I posted, but if you look at the actual cover, David Faustino's picture just doesn't look natural. For some odd ball reason, they decided to use a colorized b&w picture of him!

Now the entire Predator serise suffers from god awful cover art. I think Predator 1 takes the cake tho.



I'd like to hear the 'artists' intentions for this cover. Does he like water or something?

AKA The River Wild 2 (with returning star Kevin Bacon as the floating head ghost)

Quick and easy way to get LEO on the cover...



More floating heads, even though the theatrical art was really good.



Horrible way to stick jamie lee on the cover. Worse than the previously released VHS/DVD releases...

LAME the original poster art was a million times better. At least you can see it sort of... the logo's there... right...?

AT least the jurassic park art looks more real than these cartoon raptors...

Not bad at all, but I liked the originally banned theatrical poster more.

Apparently, this was deemed too disturbing by the MPAA... riiiiiiiiight.

BRING IT ON 2? (Oh wait, that's out there... BRING IT ON 3?) Clearly the better film of the two... it shouldn't be trying to associate with BIO...

The much better theatrical art, matches the tone of the movie more.

Eh...


Much better.

I still think the Head o' Bacon(TM) looks like an outtake from Zardoz...

Nick

I can't stop snickering at the Delta Force cover. I can just imagine seeing it for the first time in a store, and the reaction it's supposed to pull out of the consumer.

"WOW check it out Lee Marvin and Chuck Norris BOTH with Bazooka's holy shit my dream come true!"

Under the category of coverart that misrepresents the film, I give you the French release of What's Eating Gilbert Grape:



To fully capitlize on the popularity of Leo, they avoided using a mugshot of ugly "Arnie" and use a shot of him in This Boy's Life.

I'm sure there were a few disappointed 10 year girls in France.

The cover of the upcoming Stay Hungry DVD seems to focus
more on Arnold Schwarzenegger than Jeff Bridges or Sally Field.


Stay Hungry





-Mike

Amazing how either really awful Photoshop artists and/or committee design is allowed to ruin a DVD cover. You'd think producers and directors would make some noise about this crap. Sometimes it's like monkeys designing covers for monkeys who buy DVDs. "Hey look! (Favorite Actor)'s in this! Let's get it! Whoooooo-hoooooooo!!!!" Is there supposed to be some nobility in catering to the toothless, uneducated masses who shop at Wal-mart?

I just don't understand why on earth studios are permitting their product to go out with such TERRIBLE wrapping. They have NO reason to cry foul when sites like DVDCoverArt.com pop up, because if it wasn't for the studios' chintzy art staff hiring practices (scraping the bottom of the art school barrel, if they even recruit at art schools rather than hiring some homeless crackhead off the street), those sites wouldn't have much reason for existing!

I think we, as DVD fans, need to be more vocal, both when the studios ace the cover art (like Warner Bros. has been doing with its classic releases) and when they botch it up miserably.

You'd think some of these art departments would just leave it in the hands of fans like us, like make a contest out of it - present a choice of art designs online, then we vote on it, and the winner becomes the official artwork (and the studio can make alternative artwork available to download and print for those who prefer other versions). But NOOOOO, THAT would be INTELLIGENT! Can't have THAT, can we?!?

I mean, is Warner the only studio that GETS it?