Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

New Cover Art - Confessions of a Dangerous Mind


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
19 replies to this topic

#1 of 20 Patrick Mirza

Patrick Mirza

    Supporting Actor

  • 883 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 12 1999

Posted July 02 2003 - 08:14 AM

IMO, they screwed up the cover art big time:

Posted Image

It originally was to look like this (before the disc delay):

Posted Image

#2 of 20 Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul

  • 38,628 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted July 02 2003 - 08:18 AM

Yeah, the new cover art stinks.

Figures.

Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

gallery_269895_23_10043.jpg Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders gallery_269895_23_1316.jpg Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

gallery_269895_23_773.jpg Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive gallery_269895_23_992.jpgClick Here for our complete DVD review archive

gallery_269895_23_7246.jpg Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule gallery_269895_23_3120.jpg Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#3 of 20 Marc Colella

Marc Colella

    Screenwriter

  • 2,607 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 1999

Posted July 02 2003 - 08:26 AM

That's just a terrible cover.

Doesn't represent the film well at all.

Of course the studios have to sell the DVDs by showing the faces, so I guess I can't blame them.

Surprising they didn't include Julia Roberts name or face on the cover.

#4 of 20 Paul Anthony

Paul Anthony

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 169 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted July 02 2003 - 09:11 AM

The original cover art is so much better, the studios are trying to entice the public to buy (or rent) the DVD by recognizing the actors on the cover, which I think is pretty unnecessary. Posted Image

Unfortunately, the large image of the actor is now becoming the standard for DVD releases. Posted Image

BTW, I really hated the new cover art for "Footloose" they shouldn't have messed with that. Posted Image Posted Image

#5 of 20 Chuck Bogie

Chuck Bogie

    Second Unit

  • 397 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 14 2003

Posted July 02 2003 - 09:34 AM

I really like that picture of Drew with the mustache...

#6 of 20 Gary->dee

Gary->dee

    Screenwriter

  • 1,923 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2003

Posted July 02 2003 - 09:43 AM

Quote:
IMO, they screwed up the cover art big time


I agree. Perhaps they thought the poster artwork was too much like Scarface and people might get confused.
Posted Imagehttp://movieposter.c....&pid=A70-13040

Either way the new cover looks like an HBO movie.

#7 of 20 Travis_W

Travis_W

    Supporting Actor

  • 531 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 08 2000

Posted July 02 2003 - 09:56 AM

That is by far the worst cover art I have ever seen. Period. Even worse than Signs or any other controversial cover we have discussed. I was able to get the poster and now I'm glad I did.

How I loathe the noggin shots. Posted Image
I am Jack's empty signature bar.

#8 of 20 Jeff Kleist

Jeff Kleist

    Executive Producer

  • 11,286 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 04 1999

Posted July 02 2003 - 10:08 AM

Welcome to Nogginville: Population YOU!

#9 of 20 Howard Glenn

Howard Glenn

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 189 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 16 2003

Posted July 02 2003 - 10:09 AM

That's cover is cheesier than the Gong Show!

#10 of 20 Gary->dee

Gary->dee

    Screenwriter

  • 1,923 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2003

Posted July 02 2003 - 10:20 AM

I wonder when some of these studios will realize that the moviegoing public and consumers in general actually have a memory and might remember a distinct image associated with a movie hence, making the DVD purchasing process slightly easier by using the original art instead of possibly confusing people with new and uncreative DVD artwork. In other words if a movie can be identified by a single image, the poster artwork, and that remains consistant through to the DVD release, I wonder if that would inturn generate more money and possibly less confusion.

#11 of 20 Damin J Toell

Damin J Toell

    Producer

  • 3,761 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 07 2001

Posted July 02 2003 - 10:27 AM

With all due respect to the original theatrical poster (and, indeed, with all due respect to the film, which was my favorite of 2002), that poster didn't help sell too many tickets. Although Miramax's entire marketing plan for the film bears much of the blame for the poor box office run, I can't blame Miramax for trying something different for home video.

All I care about will be what's encoded on the disc itself...

DJ

#12 of 20 Seth Paxton

Seth Paxton

    Lead Actor

  • 7,588 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 05 1998

Posted July 02 2003 - 10:34 AM

Well the cover sucks BUT considering that the film went nowhere with the general public they probably figured it was pointless to keep selling the film in the original manner. It feels like a move of desperation to me.

And wasn't this film getting rereleased at the theaters, or did they scrap that idea?


Anyway, hopefully someone will make a high rez cover available in that poster art format because the new cover has replacement written all over it.

#13 of 20 Marc Colella

Marc Colella

    Screenwriter

  • 2,607 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 1999

Posted July 02 2003 - 10:51 AM

Quote:
I wonder when some of these studios will realize that the moviegoing public and consumers in general actually have a memory and might remember a distinct image associated with a movie hence, making the DVD purchasing process slightly easier by using the original art instead of possibly confusing people with new and uncreative DVD artwork. In other words if a movie can be identified by a single image, the poster artwork, and that remains consistant through to the DVD release, I wonder if that would inturn generate more money and possibly less confusion.

You're giving the average consumer too much credit. I recommend watching/listening to consumers as they browse the DVD section.

I can't count how many times I've seen someone pick up a title and claim to the person their with - "hey, this one's got so-and-so in it". Other than bigger blockbuster pictures, and films they've seen seen already - the average consumer won't remember what played at their local cineplex 6 months earlier.

These are generally the same people who purchase P&S DVDs. They just don't care as much about films/DVDs as members of this forum.

Like it or not, the studio's are smart for capitalizing on the images and names of the actors. It works.

#14 of 20 Gary->dee

Gary->dee

    Screenwriter

  • 1,923 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2003

Posted July 02 2003 - 11:03 AM

Yeah I guess you're right. Sometimes I look at the world through widescreen glasses. Posted Image

#15 of 20 Joe_Pinney

Joe_Pinney

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 183 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 28 2002
  • Real Name:Joe Pinney
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted July 02 2003 - 12:02 PM

Looks like some artists over at DVDCoverArt.com will be busy in the coming months.

High School leads to McDonald's. McDonald's leads to Telemarketing. Telemarketing leads to Car Washes. Car Washes lead to Community Colleges. Community Colleges lead to -- major Hollywood studio DVD cover art departments!Posted Image

#16 of 20 Derek Bedard

Derek Bedard

    Auditioning

  • 4 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 25 2003

Posted July 02 2003 - 03:06 PM

yes Santa Claus...that coverart does suck

#17 of 20 JulianK

JulianK

    Supporting Actor

  • 844 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 03 2000

Posted July 02 2003 - 08:37 PM

Not only is that new version one of the suckiest covers ever, I can't figure out how Drew Barrymore ended up getting top billing in this movie!

Maybe the studio thought that the theatrical release was soooooooooooooooooo long ago, that the disc needed a new sleeve to improve its chances.

Whatever, I'll be picking this up as soon as it's released, but that new cover is history as soon as a replacement is available!

#18 of 20 Damin J Toell

Damin J Toell

    Producer

  • 3,761 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 07 2001

Posted July 02 2003 - 08:39 PM

Quote:
Not only is that new version one of the suckiest covers ever, I can't figure out how Drew Barrymore ended up getting top billing in this movie!


Perhaps because the billing is alphabetical by last name? She had top billing in the original theatrical poster, too.

DJ

#19 of 20 Paul_Stachniak

Paul_Stachniak

    Screenwriter

  • 1,303 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 07 2003

Posted July 03 2003 - 05:17 AM

Holy crap, that sucks.

Why would anybody select this over the original?!?
DVD Collection | Video Game Collection | Live Gamertag: vicodinjunkie

#20 of 20 Jeff Kleist

Jeff Kleist

    Executive Producer

  • 11,286 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 04 1999

Posted July 03 2003 - 06:09 AM

They should just offer original art on the flipside

Ship it with noggins, let us flip it over for Artistry





Forum Nav Content I Follow