Patrick Mirza
Supporting Actor
- Joined
- Mar 12, 1999
- Messages
- 877
IMO, they screwed up the cover art big timeI agree. Perhaps they thought the poster artwork was too much like Scarface and people might get confused.
http://movieposter.com/cgi-bin/showp...&pid=A70-13040
Either way the new cover looks like an HBO movie.
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.
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